Working Group Meeting

Date: 03/04/2025  
Participants: Natalie Muric, Thomas Peterson, Kok Wim
Model editor: Andreea Pasăre
Note editor: Achilles Dougalis

Agenda

  • Discuss the mappings between fields from the TC440 Order Data model to ePO concepts.

Discussions

  • Field BT-OHI-6 : The field represents a reference of the Order. We are going to delete the existing epo-ord:hasCustomerReference attribute, and turn it into a predicate connecting epo:PostAwardDocument to adms:Identifier.

    • Definition: "A supplementary reference used to identify the Buyer’s internal process."

yjxf5WQQJrRpmFRAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC

  • Field BG-ADR: Question: Is this a Document, or a PostAwardDocument?

    • Answer: It should be placed at the level of the Document.

  • Field BG-IPSP: What role should we use for that? We should create the epo-ord:Invoicee role and not just use buyer as mentioned in https://docs.ted.europa.eu/epo-wgm/notes/2023-02-21-eord.html#_agenda.

    • Class epo-ord:Invoicee was created as a subclass of the Acquiring Party.

      • Definition: "The Role of an Agent who receives and processes the Invoices."

g8QZVW4Vq1HsQAAAABJRU5ErkJggg==

  • Predicate epo:specifiesInvoicee was added.

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

  • Predicates epo:exposesInvoiceeChannel, and IndicatesInvoiceeContactPoint from epo:Buyer were removed.

YrXkevoI0EQAAAABJRU5ErkJggg==

  • Field BT-ODI-1-4-8

    • At the level of epo-ord:DeliveryInformation, attribute epo-ord:hasDeliveryEmail was created.

      • Definition: "The electronic address to which the products or services are to be delivered."

  • Field BG-ODT: the solution provided in the ePO Github issue #623 was explained.

    • Attribute epo:GeneralDeliveryTerm was renamed to epo:hasGeneralDeliveryTerm

    • locn:geographicName should be used for BT-ORDT-3 instead of an identifier.

    • Field BT-ORDT-4 was discussed.

      • epo-ord:hasRequestedShippingPriority was removed from epo-ord:DeliveryInformation, and was put under epo-ord:DeliveryAgreement

  • ePO Github issue #767 was discussed and marked as completed for the fields:

    • BT-OAI-6-4 "Order allowance Exemption reason text"

    • BT-OAI-6-5 "Order allowance VAT exemption reason and specification code".

    • BT-OCI-6-4 "Order charge Exemption reason text"

    • BT-OCI-6-5 "Order charge VAT exemption reason and specification code".

  • Field BT-OTO-5 in Github Issue #696 was discussed, updated and closed.

  • Field BT-OL-6-5 should only be used in the Order Change. Was removed.

  • Field BT-OL-10 implemented as discussed in Github issue #766, and the solution provided was acknowledged by the Working Group.

  • Field BT-OL-11: It was decided to re-use attribute epo-ordhasAccountingCost at the level of the OrderLine.

  • Field BT-II-10-3: To create a GitHub issue to ask about the ItemNameCode. (Code for the item property according to a property code system)

  • Fields: BT-OAHI-10, BT-OCAREHI-10, BT-OCACOHI-10, etc. :It was agreed that we shall use attribute epo:hasAdditionalInformation at the level of epo:Document for these fields.

  • The diagrams for the OrderChange, OrderCancellation and OrderAgreement were presented:

A4bXTOkFX8dqAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC

Order Change diagram

wPJPKV+dT58eAAAAABJRU5ErkJggg==

Order Cancellation diagram

weBi1DXscWlKgAAAABJRU5ErkJggg==

Order Agreement diagram.

  • Regarding Order Response:

    • Proposal to change epo-ord:hasAcceptanceStatus predicate from OrderResponseInformation to epo-ord:hasStatus

    • Predicate ImplementsContract from OrderResponse was deleted as it was not in use.

LMfxFoJmEOwAAAAASUVORK5CYII=

Action Points

  • To Reply to #695

  • Add a github issue for Item Property code.

TED Developer Docs

This website is managed by: Publications Office of the European Union

Need Help?

Follow us

Legal

About us

Other services

Discover more on europa.eu

Contact the EU

Social Media

EU institutions and bodies