Working Group meeting
Date: 26/11/2024
Participants: Victorio Bentivogli, Natalie Muric, Giovanni Paolo Selito
Model editor: Andreea Passare
Note editor: Achilles Dougalis
Agenda
-
Investigate why a Tender is supported by only one ESPD response
-
It was mentioned that the epo-eva:EvaluationReport is very similar to the epo:TenderAwardOutcome. To be decided in the future if we need to keep both of these concepts.
-
Could the evaluation and the award criteria be different ? To be discussed in the next meeting.
Discussions
-
It was discussed that indeed, 1 ESPD can be used for one or more Tenders. Consequently, epo:Tender epo-eva:isSupportedBy epo-sub:ESPD cardinality was changed from [1] to [1..*] .
-
It was mentioned that sometimes the Evaluation committee could be a system rather than a group of people. It was decided that it is going to be implemented only as a group of people for now.
-
As seen in the pictures below, further changes were made to the diagrams presented in the 20241119 WGM.
-
Ticket https://github.com/OP-TED/ePO/issues/686 was updated:
Implement predicate epo:foreseesSubcontractor [0..*] having the following definition:-
"Relation indicating that an Organization plans to have a Subcontractor. Additional information: In eForms, in a Result Notice, the foreseen Subcontractors in a Tender are associated to the Organization that proposes the Subcontractors. The Subcontractor is associated to the Organization, rather than the Tenderer, so that, in the case of multiple Organizations being a Tenderer, it is clear to which Organization the proposed Subcontractor is associated.”
-
