Technical Handbook v3.1.0 inconsistencies - cbc:CustomizationID is missing from root element table in section 2.4 #interproc

[konstantinosraptis91]

Hello ESPD team,

It seems that the cbc:CustomizationID element has been omitted in the technical handbook version 3.1.0 in the relevant root elements table, but I can still see it in the above UML diagram.

[delgajc]

Good afternoon,
The root elements table in the technical handbook is aligned with the conceptual data model for the mentioned class: QualificationApplicationRequest. The CustomizationID attribute was removed in previous versions of ESPD.

However, in the section 2.3 of the technical handbook, there is indeed an UML image with this attribute inside the class. This is a mistake and that image will be corrected in the documentation.

Kind Regards,
The ESPD Team.

[konstantinosraptis91]

Good morning,

Thank you for your answer. I see that the "cbc:CustomizationID" root element was present in the previous version (3.0.1) of the ESPD-EDM. I also tried to find a text regarding this removal in the release notes but couldn't find anything. We are using the value coming from this element in our code, and this change is having an impact on us. It would be nice if there was a reference for changes of this kind in the release notes.

[delgajc]

Dear Konstatinos,

the removal of this CustomizationID attribute was part of the removal of all the CEN-BII references implemented in release 3.1.0, in this case this attribute was used to store the reference.

The removal of the CEN-BII references was indeed included in the release notes for 3.1.0, but not with the full detail of the changes. Apologies for that.

Kind Regards,
The ESPD Team.

[delgajc]

Dear Konstantinos,

for CustomizationID and ProfileID we cannot publish in the documentation the value, nor the source reference for copyright issues.

Could you please clarify if what you need are:
a) the two elements back in all the relevant ESPD artefacts or
b) you need the values?

Option b is not feasible for us

Kind Regards,
The ESPD Team.

[konstantinosraptis91]

Hello @delgajc ,

If I understand it correctly, option a) is to roll back the removal of those two elements, correct? But the wording of option b) confusing me a little bit. Assuming you are implementing option a), would the rolled-back elements have the same values as before?

[konstantinosraptis91]

Hello ESPD team,

Following the discussion we had during the OUC meeting on the 23rd of March, to ensure we are on the same page, it is agreed that the elements (cbc:CustomizationID, cbc:ProfileID) will be restored but with different values (no CEN-BII references). If I understand correctly, this change will not be a part of the v3.2.0 release. The question now is, what about the new values the two elements will contain? At least considering the cbc:CustomizationID, it is crucial to include two fixed values to achieve interoperability because, to me, it is a little bit unclear who will decide for those two values (one for the ESD Request and one for the ESPD Response). The same question applies to the cbc:ProfileID.

[arillpa]

Dear Konstantinos,
After a second round of discussions at OP concerning the use of CustomizationID element we arrived to the following conclusion:

• CustomizationID is not mandatory to identify the Response nor the Request: these Request and Response can be identified in the xml file root element
• Therefore the element will not be put back to version 3.2.0 of the ESPD-EDM
• We will analyse and consult with the OUC members how/if to add back in a future release different to 3.X.X the CustomizationID element to be used as per eForms, that is to identify the sdk eForms schema and rules, https://docs.ted.europa.eu/eforms/latest/schema/notice-information.html#customIDSection
• Also putting back the element cbc:ProfileID will be discuss with the OUC member for a future release.

KR
The ESPD Team