-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 52
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Foreseen implementation of General Yearly Turnover Selection Criteria in ESPD-EDM version 3.3.0 #402
Comments
Hello @andreea-pasare, Thank you for your question. This issue is related to the criterion C29 SC gen-year-to (general yearly turnover). The number of fiscal years defines year 1, year 2 and so on. When the EO answers to the related QSG (period, amount) that is of multiple cardinality, the number of occurrences of this QSG is the number of fiscal years. In this QSG, the EO provides the start and end date (period) of each fiscal year that is automatically bound to year 1, year 2 and so on, with respect to the related minimum amount requirement for the corresponding amount field, where the requirement is previously defined by the Buyer. The order of questions in this QSG has to be inverted following the criterion C32 SC spec-year-to as to provide the period before the amount. This update will appear in the next release. The following mock-ups screenshots might help to clarify doubts. When the threshold requirement box is not checked, the same minimum requirement amount is applied for all the fiscal years. When the threshold requirement box is checked, a different minimum requirement amount is applied for each fiscal year. In the EO view, when the threshold has been checked, the EO has a view of the various requirements amount for each year and hence can fill in properly the related QSG. See also the online documentation : https://docs.ted.europa.eu/ESPD-EDM/3.0.1/xml_technical_handbook.html#_turnovers Kind regards, The ESPD Team. |
Since we don't have any further comments, we proceed to close this github issue. |
Fix TEDSPD-624 #402 Inversing order of questions in QSG for Period and Amount.
The use cases need to be made clear. The minimum requirement has a cardinality of 1..n but it is not clear how this should be used.
More detailes on the ePO Working Group Meeting minutes.
Related to #44.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: