-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 0
Issues: OP-TED/ted-rdf-mapping
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
Author
Label
Projects
Milestones
Assignee
Sort
Issues list
Include mapping to property something requested to be implemented in a future release
epo:isDesignContest
in the conceptual mapping of form F13
type: feature request
epo:refersToLot
relation should be used only on epo-not:ResultNotice
instances
type: bug
Question about modelling section V.0.4: Contract/lot/concession/prize NOT awarded
type: feature request
something requested to be implemented in a future release
type: implementation question
something needs clarified, refined or decided before the implementation can continue
F20: Don't create Tender instance if no information is attached to it
type: feature request
something requested to be implemented in a future release
Additional encoding of legal basis, in addition to something needs clarified, refined or decided before the implementation can continue
epo:hasLegalBasis
on Notice.
type: implementation question
F20: Delete Something implemented incorrectly in a release.
epo:refersToLot
relation originating from the Notice instance
type: bug
Harmonise the Conceptual Mapping
type: feature request
something requested to be implemented in a future release
rdf:PlainLiteral and rdfs:Literal relation
type: feature request
something requested to be implemented in a future release
type: implementation question
something needs clarified, refined or decided before the implementation can continue
V.3.2.3 Number of Tenders from other countries
type: feature request
something requested to be implemented in a future release
#402
opened May 3, 2023 by
valexande
Feedback F20 (issue 11, CM): VI.3 Consider adding Notice hasAdditionalInformation to EPO
type: feature request
something requested to be implemented in a future release
#400
opened May 3, 2023 by
csnyulas
Feedback F13, F20, F23 PIN (issue 9 from F23 PIN, TM): VI.4.3 The ontology does not foresee CompetitionNotice refersToLot so this mapping cannot work.
type: implementation question
something needs clarified, refined or decided before the implementation can continue
Feedback F23 PIN (issue 8, TM): II.2.7.2 and II.2.7.3 a time has been added to the Start and End date
act: for closing
it can be closed but an additional confirmation is needed
type: implementation question
something needs clarified, refined or decided before the implementation can continue
type: missing feature
something expected but missing from a release
Feedback F13, F20, F23 PIN (issue 5 from F23 PIN, TM): CompetitionNotice announcesProcedure instead of CompetitionNotice refersToProcedure
type: implementation question
something needs clarified, refined or decided before the implementation can continue
Feedback F23 PIN (issue 4, TM): II.2 whole section is wrongly mapped as it is mapped to refersToLot which is the case for the ResultNotice
type: implementation question
something needs clarified, refined or decided before the implementation can continue
Feedback F20 (issue 10, TM): V.2.2.6 ContractModificationNotice numberng and field is wrong
type: implementation question
something needs clarified, refined or decided before the implementation can continue
Feedback F20 (issue 8, CM): It is not clear why there is a mapping to non-awarded contract
type: missing feature
something expected but missing from a release
Feedback F13 (issue 7, CM): V.3.0.1 mentions Tenders at header level of the section
type: bug
Something implemented incorrectly in a release.
type: feature request
something requested to be implemented in a future release
Is the mapping of fields III.1.4.1 and III.1.9.2 correct?
act: for closing
it can be closed but an additional confirmation is needed
type: implementation question
something needs clarified, refined or decided before the implementation can continue
#344
opened Feb 16, 2023 by
csnyulas
How to map something needs clarified, refined or decided before the implementation can continue
epo:hasRestatedEstimatedValue
when LOT_NO on AWARD_CONTRACT is missing or does not match the LOT_NO values on the OBJECT_DESCR
type: implementation question
How should we map fields I.3.3.1 (something requested to be implemented in a future release
type: implementation question
something needs clarified, refined or decided before the implementation can continue
ADDRESS_FURTHER_INFO_IDEM
) and I.3.4.2 (CONTRACTING_BODY/ADDRESS_PARTICIPATION_IDEM
) when there are multiple Buyers
type: feature request
#333
opened Jan 30, 2023 by
csnyulas
Update property names used on different types of notices (e.g. refersToRole vs. announcesRole, refersToProcedure vs. announcesProcedure etc),
type: feature request
something requested to be implemented in a future release
Award Criterion - Order of importance
type: feature request
something requested to be implemented in a future release
type: implementation question
something needs clarified, refined or decided before the implementation can continue
#325
opened Jan 24, 2023 by
muricna
(Duplicate with #293) Change prefixes of notice types from epo: to epo-not:
type: feature request
something requested to be implemented in a future release
II.1.5.3 Why is there no mapping for this element or suggestion for future mapping
type: feature request
something requested to be implemented in a future release
#321
opened Jan 23, 2023 by
muricna
Previous Next
ProTip!
Find all open issues with in progress development work with linked:pr.