BT-735-Lot vs. BT-735-LotResult

[rkottmann]

Hi

if I correctly translate the below fields definitions (v1.7.0), then

BT-735-Lot can occur/is allowed in notice-types:

7-22 and 29-31 and E4 and 38-40 and E5

BT-735-LotResult can occur/is allowed in notice-types:

29-31 and E4 and 38-40 and E5

i.e. BT-735 can occur twice in 29-31 and E4 and 38-40 and E5.

Is this correct in terms of business requirement(s)?

Naively, I would assume BT-735-LotResult should be the only one in CANs.

thanks in advance,

renzo

Excerpts from fields.json:

"id" : "BT-735-Lot",
...   
  "btId" : "BT-735",
  "xpathAbsolute" : "/*/cac:ProcurementProjectLot[cbc:ID/@schemeName='Lot']/cac:TenderingTerms/ext:UBLExtensions/ext:UBLExtension/ext:ExtensionContent/efext:EformsExtension/efac:StrategicProcurement/efac:StrategicProcurementInformation/efbc:ProcurementCategoryCode",
  ...
  "forbidden" : {
    "value" : false,
    "severity" : "ERROR",
    "constraints" : [ {
      "noticeTypes" : [ "1", "2", "3", "4", "5", "6", "23", "24", "25", "26", "27", "28", "32", "33", "34", "35", "36", "37", "CEI", "T01", "T02", "X01", "X02" ],
    ...

and

"id" : "BT-735-LotResult",
...
  "btId" : "BT-735",
  "xpathAbsolute" : "/*/ext:UBLExtensions/ext:UBLExtension/ext:ExtensionContent/efext:EformsExtension/efac:NoticeResult/efac:LotResult/efac:StrategicProcurement/efac:StrategicProcurementInformation/efbc:ProcurementCategoryCode",
  ...
  "forbidden" : {
    "value" : false,
    "severity" : "ERROR",
    "constraints" : [ {
      "noticeTypes" : [ "1", "2", "3", "4", "5", "6", "7", "8", "9", "10", "11", "12", "13", "14", "15", "16", "17", "18", "19", "20", "21", "22", "23", "24", "25", "26", "27", "28", "32", "33", "34", "35", "36", "37", "CEI", "T01", "T02", "X01", "X02" ]

[rouschr]

In SDK 1.7:

{
    "id" : "BT-735-Lot",
    "parentNodeId" : "ND-StrategicProcurementInformationLot", <-------------- This could impact repeatability
    "name" : "CVD Contract Type",
    "btId" : "BT-735",
    "xpathAbsolute" : "/*/cac:ProcurementProjectLot[cbc:ID/@schemeName='Lot']/cac:TenderingTerms/ext:UBLExtensions/ext:UBLExtension/ext:ExtensionContent/efext:EformsExtension/efac:StrategicProcurement/efac:StrategicProcurementInformation/efbc:ProcurementCategoryCode",
    "xpathRelative" : "efbc:ProcurementCategoryCode",
    "xsdSequenceOrder" : [ { "efbc:ProcurementCategoryCode" : 1 } ],
    "type" : "code",
    "legalType" : "CODE",
    "repeatable" : {
      "value" : false, <----------------- The field itself does not repeat, but some parent node could repeat (see parentNodeId repeatable)
      "severity" : "ERROR"
    },
    "forbidden" : {
      "value" : false, <----------------- If constraint does not apply, fallback on this
      "severity" : "ERROR",
      "constraints" : [ {
        "noticeTypes" : [ "1", "2", "3", "4", "5", "6", "23", "24", "25", "26", "27", "28", "32", "33", "34", "35", "36", "37", "CEI", "T01", "T02", "X01", "X02" ],
        "value" : true, <---------------- Forbidden if for notice sub types in noticeTypes array above
        "severity" : "ERROR"
      } ]
    },
    "codeList" : {
      "value" : {
        "id" : "cvd-contract-type",
        "type" : "flat"
      },
      "severity" : "ERROR"
    }
  },

You can use the editor demo or enotices2 to see how it can look in a form.