Working Group meeting 14/10/2021
Date: 14/10/2021
Participants: Cecile Guasch, Hilde Kjølset, Giorgia Lodi, Natalie Muric, Giovanni Paolo Sellitto
Model editor: Andreea Pasăre
Note editor: Paloma Arillo
Agenda:
-
Continue modelling the subroles === List of subroles:
Organisation-subrole table definition: This table provides the list of the different sub-functions of the organisations in a procurement procedure.
bud-pay |
Organisation whose budget is used to pay for the contract |
exec-pay |
Organisation executing the payment |
group-lead |
Group leader |
info-prov |
Organisation providing additional information about the procurement procedure |
offl-acc |
Organisation providing offline access to the procurement documents |
hprocessor |
Organisation processing tenders |
recepient |
Organisation receiving tenders |
req-proc |
Organisation processing requests to participate |
req-recep |
Organisation receiving requests to participate |
rev-info |
Organisation providing more information on the review procedures |
signatory |
Organisation signing the contract |
-
Decision: all subroles--- Ask DG GROW to change the naming or add AltLabels for all subroles:
-
remove the word ’Organisation’ from all labels.
-
bud-pay → Organisation whose budget is used to pay for the contract, should be replaced with ‘Funding the contract’.
-
group-lead→ Group leader should be replaced with ‘Leading the group’.
-
-
Decision: “rev-info” subrole ==== Issue
-
The organisation executing the function of providing information about the review procedure can play the role of buyer, reviewer, mediator or service provider listed in ‘organisation-role’, how to reflect that they cannot play the function of providing review procedure information in the same procedure
-
The label itself is ambiguous. === Discussion
-
The situation is from whom we should get the information to request a review for a procedure.
The label is ambiguous: does it refer to the information about the procedure to follow for requesting a review itself? Does it refer to the information about the type of complaints that lead to requesting for a review? It seems to refer to where to get the information about how to request a review.
BG-612 checked to see if it can also be per Lot. We keep only ‘Procedure’ in the model.
How to show in the instance example that there are 4 possible roles that can play the function but not them all at the same time?
It is possible to infer from th eURI of the ‘rev-info’ which is his main role?
After checking the Excel file eForms business terms it seems obvious that role and subrole and flat lists so there is no need to link the role to the sub-role. An organisation plays a role and could play a subrole.
The reification does not necessarily imply a hierarchy role to subrole.
Chosen solution:
Diagram
Instance example
Choice 1: it seems in this example that the 4 roles can play the same function of ‘rev-info’ for the same procedure
Choice 2
Choice 3
No need for an instance example.
No reification needed which means no instance diagram needed.
In the ePO model in the ‘Procurement Term’ we add a class ‘Agent’ linked to ‘ReviewTerm’: hasAgentProvidingReviewProcedureInformation. Agent providing review info.
(We could alternatively use the reification and the instance diagram).
Rationale
The function is about who can provide information about the procedures concerning review requests.
Only 4 roles can play the subrole rev-info but there is no need to link the subrole to the role in the examples. So there is no need for creating an instance example (choice 3).
-
Decision: “req-recep” subrole === Discussion
Refers to the function of receiving the requests to participate in a tender. We checked BG 102 and this subrole seems to be also possible at Lot level although this seems a very extreme situation.
However, BT-770 clearly refers to the Procedure and not to the Lot.
Discussion to be continued on 19 October 2021
