Linking roles to PlannedProcurementParts (Mapping of fields `OPT-301-Part-FiscalLegis`, `OPT-301-Part-EnvironLegis`, `OPT-301-Part-EmployLegis`, `OPT-301-Part-TenderReceipt`, `OPT-301-Part-TenderEval`, `OPT-301-Part-AddInfo` and `OPT-301-Part-DocProvider`)

[csnyulas]

This issue is about the mapping of various roles that are related to the "PlannedProcurementParts" in eForms:

• OPT-301-Part-FiscalLegis (or ND-PartFiscalLegislation) --> epo:TaxInformationProvider
• OPT-301-Part-EnvironLegis (or ND-PartEnvironmentalLegislation) --> epo:EnvironmentalProtectionInformationProvider
• OPT-301-Part-EmployLegis (or ND-PartEmploymentLegislation) --> epo:EmploymentInformationProvider
• OPT-301-Part-TenderReceipt --> epo:TenderReceiver
• OPT-301-Part-TenderEval --> epo:TenderProcessor
• OPT-301-Part-AddInfo --> epo:ProcurementProcedureInformationProvider
• OPT-301-Part-DocProvider --> epo:OfflineAccessProvider

As shown in the procurement object relations diagram, the various roles can be related to an epo:PlannedProcurementPart instance only through instantiating an epo:ProcurementObject (which may or may not become a lot or a procedure in a later phase of the process), which is linked through the epo:foreseesProcurementObject property. This is not ideal. It could make more sense if there would be a epo:contextualisedBy directly to epo:PlannedProcurementPart (or perhaps to their common superclass epo:ProcurementElement).

Also, the epo:definesTenderProcessor, epo:definesTenderReceiver, epo:definesProcurementProcedureInformationProvider and epo:definesOfflineAccessProvider and some new epo:definesXXX properties could be added to link all the above roles to epo:PlannedProcurementPart, without the need to instantiate the epo:AccessTerm and epo:SubmissionTerm classes.

[andreea-pasare]

As of ePO 5.0.0, the following implementation is adopted (epo:AgentInRole epo:contextualisedBy epo:ProcurementElement):

Regarding the second request, since those roles are defined at the level of epo:AccessTerm and epo:SubmissionTerm in the case of a epo:Lot, we will keep the same implementation for a epo:PlannedProcurementPart.