Skip to content
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

Faulty Group-Definitions in several Notice-Types. #870

Open
duranalp opened this issue Mar 27, 2024 · 7 comments
Open

Faulty Group-Definitions in several Notice-Types. #870

duranalp opened this issue Mar 27, 2024 · 7 comments
Labels
notice-types Related to the notice type definitions (/notice-types).

Comments

@duranalp
Copy link

We found different Group Definition GR-Procedure-Description in several Notice-Types.
In our point of view, these group definition shall be same in all notice types.

We assume that the correct Definition is in Notice-Type 16.json

"id" : "GR-Procedure-Description",
        "contentType" : "group",
        "displayType" : "GROUP",
        "description" : "Description",
        "_label" : "group|name|GR-Procedure-Description",

In several Notice Types for e.g. Notice-Type 29.json the group is defined wrong

        "id" : "GR-Procedure-Description",
        "contentType" : "group",
        "nodeId" : "ND-ProcedureProcurementScope",
        "displayType" : "GROUP",
        "description" : "Scope of the Procurement addressed with the whole notice",
        "_label" : "group|name|ND-ProcedureProcurementScope"

We are using SDK 1.10.x we asking also for a patch of the SDK 1.10.x

@rouschr rouschr added the notice-types Related to the notice type definitions (/notice-types). label Mar 27, 2024
@duranalp
Copy link
Author

duranalp commented Apr 8, 2024

Hi i want to slightly ask if you have an update for this issue?

@duranalp
Copy link
Author

Now 3 Weeks are gone, and i did not get any feedback. Why?

@bertrand-lorentz
Copy link
Contributor

Sorry for the delayed response.

The difference is that in 29.json (and other notice subtypes), this group is associated with the node "ND-ProcedureProcurementScope". In 16..json it is not the case.
This is indeed inconsistent. This association might not be correct, as there are fields under ND-ProcedureProcurementScope that are not shown under GR-Procedure-Description.

We will review this and correct it in a future SDK version.

@GarrusMD
Copy link

Is there an update for this issue?

@GarrusMD
Copy link

I have just seen that in the RC for 1.12 the label in subtype 16 has been changed:

"id" : "GR-Procedure-Description",
"contentType" : "group",
"nodeId" : "ND-ProcedureProcurementScope",
"displayType" : "GROUP",
"description" : "Scope of the Procurement addressed with the whole notice",
"_label" : "group|name|ND-ProcedureProcurementScope",

In my opinion, this change is incorrect. The label "group|name|GR-Procedure-Description" should be the correct one for the "GR-Procedure-Description.

I agree with @duranalp that the flaw is in subtype 29 (and other notice subtypes).

@GarrusMD
Copy link

GarrusMD commented Jul 2, 2024

@bertrand-lorentz @YvesJo

@YvesJo
Copy link
Contributor

YvesJo commented Jul 3, 2024

Hi,
Groups and associated labels are purely for the UI. As indicated in § 3.9 of the eForms Policy Implementation Handbook:

Labels are the texts used in user interfaces for manually filled fields. They are based on simplified eForms descriptions (parts of the descriptions appear as tooltips). The Publications Office of the EU will offer default set of labels in all EU official languages, used in the eNotices2 software application and in the TED website.
Designers could make eProcurement systems more user-friendly by tailoring labels further. For example, labels can be tailored based on users (e.g. professional procurers may prefer legal terminology, SMEs and occasional procurers may prefer more user-friendly terminology), the system (e.g. form-filling vs. form-displaying), etc.

The most appropriate option has been selected given the constraints and the need to have this fixed for SDK 1.12.
KR

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
notice-types Related to the notice type definitions (/notice-types).
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

5 participants