Working Group meeting 27/04/2023

Date: 27/04/2023
Participants: Natalie Muric, Christian Mondini Consrzio, Ivan Willer, Pietro Palermo, Sellitto Giovanni Paolo, Wim Kok. Thomas Pettersson
Model editor: Andreea Pasăre
Note editor: Jana Ahmad

Agenda

Goal: Discuss the current status and any potential improvements/harmonisations needed for the eCatalogue, eFulfilment, and eOrdering modules.

  • Discuss removing "postAward" objects and considering them as a document.

  • Also, consider "epo-cat:announcesPostAwardObject."

  • Revise "epo-cat:hasExternalSpecification" property in the "epo-cat:item" object and consider deleting it since we have added "epo-cat:hasExternalSpecification" association between "epo-cat:Item" and "epo:Document."

  • Change eCat:Item to epo:Item

  • Discuss adopting "epo" as a uniform namespace prefix in the ePO model.

  • Revise the naming of "epo-cat:ItemDescription" to align it between modules.

  • Discuss aligning VAT and other tax categories between modules.

  • Propose using "TaxInformation" instead of "hasVATRate" and "hasVATCategory."

  • What is the difference between TaxInformationSchema and TaxInformation?

  • Discuss if "epo-ord:PriceDiscountInformation" and "epo-cat:ChargeInformation" are the same and align them across modules.

  • Propose changing "epo-cat:specifiesItem" to "epo:specifiesDeliverable."

  • Propose adopting "epo-cat:Deliverable" into all modules.

  • Discuss the difference between "epo:Contractor" and "epo-ord:Seller" for all modules.

  • Decide whether "epo:hasSerialID" should be at the Item level or the Batch level.

  • A party should have authorization. This needs to be modeled. Take into account the Certificate as well.

  • Discuss epo-ord:TaxInformation definition.

  • Discuss removing epo-ord:DeliveryTerm.

  • Discuss the proposal to change epo-cat:ItemDescription to 'epo-cat:ItemProperty

  • Considering the possibility of moving 'TaxInformation' to 'epo-cat:Item', but further investigation is required

  • What is the Difference between epo:hasManufacturerItemID and epo:hasSerialID

Discussion:

  • The WG has approved the removal of the "postAwardObject" class and instead considers "postAward" objects as documents for the eOrdering, eCatalogue, and eFulfilment modules, at least for now. Further discussion is required for the eOrdering module.

    • The proposal is to consider po-ord:OrderResponse as the type of epo-ord:Order, but further discussion is required.

  • The WG approved to Remove "epo-cat:hasExternalSpecification" property in the "epo-cat:item" in Catalogue class

  • The WG has agreed upon the use of 'epo' as the standardized namespace prefix in the ePO model.

8Bs01oDOcG8HcAAAAASUVORK5CYII=

  • The WG has approved changing from 'epo-cat:ItemDescription' to 'epo:ItemProperty', but we need to check the inheritance with 'epo-elementDescription'.

  • Discuss aligning VAT and other tax categories between modules.

    • Change the property from "epo-ful:hasBaseAmount" to "epo:isCalculatedOn" in both "epo-ord:AllowanceChargeInformation" and "epo-ord:TaxInformation".

lypQMNnN7v8AAAAASUVORK5CYII=

  • Allowance Charge Information and related information to be discussed later

    • epo-ord:AllowanceChargeInformation epo-ord:LineAllowanceInformation, ord:LineChargeInformation at line and header level

    • epo-ord:PriceDiscountInformation in price level.

Z

  • The WG approved that "epo:Contractor" and "epo-ord:Seller" are the same for all modules. However, it still needs to be determined how to incorporate this into the model."

The WG discussed the Difference between epo:hasManufacturerItemID and epo:hasSerialID​

  • Manufacturer Item Id is the Identifier of item in manufacture side.

  • Serial Id is the Identifier of instance of item.

  • The WG proposed to have epo:hasBatchId in item instance level.

9k=

  • The WG discussed the need for parties to have authorization.

    • The WG has approved the proposal to have a certificate for organizations, but further discussion is needed for Items.

  • Discuss Removing epo-ord:DeliveryTerm​

    • We should keep DeliveryTerm in contract

    • For eOrdering: we should consider the following diagram

    • epo:hasGeneralDeliveryTerm​, epo:hasDeliveryTermDescription​ ​ properties will be added to epo-ord:DeliveryInformation

    • epo:specifiesDeliveryTermLocation​ relatin will be added between epo-ord:DeliveryInformation and dct:Location

    • epo-ord:DeliveryTerm needs further discussion.

9k=

Action points:

  • The WG has approved changing from 'epo-cat:ItemDescription' to 'epo:ItemProperty', but we need to check the inheritance with 'epo-elementDescription'.

  • Change the property from "epo-ful:hasBaseAmount" to "epo:isCalculatedOn" in both "epo-ord:AllowanceChargeInformation" and "epo-ord:TaxInformation".

  • Create a diagram for Allowance Charge Information and related information

  • Draw tables for all terms and definitions for Batch, Item, Identifier.