Strategic procurement - URIs

[cristianvasquez]

StrategicProcurements in ePO v4.0 look like this:

The LOT-0001 from notice publication number 00633605-2024 is associated with two strategic procurements, both classified as epo:SocialProcurement. One of these procurements meets a requirement, while the other does not.

[cristianvasquez]

Another sample: http://data.europa.eu/a4g/resource/id_5e45be65-1269-4f67-a66d-51d7c694b0fc_StrategicProcurement_XvBhcxJMH8YDmZ4USSDPnt

The XML contains one label and one type (publication number = 00563975-2024), however the results appear conflated.

			<cac:ProcurementAdditionalType>
				<cbc:ProcurementTypeCode listName="strategic-procurement">env-imp</cbc:ProcurementTypeCode>
				<cbc:ProcurementType languageID="CES">Zadavatel požaduje po dodavateli balení předmětu plnění do obalů vyrobených ze snadno recyklovatelných materiálů nebo materiálů z obnovených zdrojů nebo se musí jednat o obalový systém pro opakované použití. Všechny obalové materiály musí být ručně snadno oddělitelné na recyklovatelné části tvořené jedním materiálem (např. papír, plast).</cbc:ProcurementType>
			</cac:ProcurementAdditionalType>

[cristianvasquez]

example instance

[ahmadjana]

Thanks, @cristianvasquez .

The following nodes generating these instances are repeatable:

• ND-StrategicProcurementType
• ND-LotSocialObjectiveType
• ND-LotEnvironmentalImpactType, and
• ND-LotGreenCriteria

Because of this, their values cannot be merged in a meaningful manner in RDF, so they are represented as separate instances, matching the XML structure.

For example, the RDF fragment you provided is generated from this source XML:

<cac:ProcurementAdditionalType>
  <cbc:ProcurementTypeCode listName="strategic-procurement">soc-obj</cbc:ProcurementTypeCode>
  <cbc:ProcurementType languageID="CES">...</cbc:ProcurementType>
</cac:ProcurementAdditionalType>
<cac:ProcurementAdditionalType>
  <cbc:ProcurementTypeCode listName="social-objective">other</cbc:ProcurementTypeCode>
</cac:ProcurementAdditionalType>

[cristianvasquez]

Hi @ahmadjana , I agree that they should be treated as separate instances. The issue, however, is that occasionally, multiple instances share the same subject URI, leading to a conflated entity, as in this example

It seems there might be an issue with how the URI is being minted. A safer alternative for entities like these could be to use blank nodes instead.

[schivmeister]

For the record, like most other such issues, this is due to human error in the URI construction, but not an issue of the URI scheme per se.

The paths in the subject template hash are wrong across the relevant mappings (the properties for the language tag were split out into dedicated TriplesMaps and have their own templates that need to also be in sync).

This touches an old mapping and will therefore be solved at a later time. I have applied the deferred label for now.

[andreea-pasare]

We need to discuss whether the epo:StrategicProcurement needs to be instantiated when a subclass of it is already instantiated.

[schivmeister]

We need to discuss whether the epo:StrategicProcurement needs to be instantiated when a subclass of it is already instantiated.

@andreea-pasare Note that @cristianvasquez cited an example with conflated values, so the issue is not about redundant assertions of type, although that could be a separate issue.