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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Part IV: Selection criteria, C: Technical and professional ability (CA`s) #287

Closed
AJDAKOST opened this issue Nov 4, 2020 · 14 comments
Closed

Part IV: Selection criteria, C: Technical and professional ability (CA`s) #287

AJDAKOST opened this issue Nov 4, 2020 · 14 comments

Comments

@AJDAKOST
Copy link

AJDAKOST commented Nov 4, 2020

CA`s side

Part IV: Selection criteria, C: Technical and professional ability

Criteria:
Subcontracting proportion
For supply contracts: samples, descriptions or photographs without certification of authenticity
For supply contracts: samples, descriptions or photographs with certification of authenticity
For supply contracts: certificates by quality control institutes

We suggest adding window Requirement as non-obligatory data, as it is used for example in Criteria: For works contracts: technicians or technical bodies to carry out the work.
@hricolor
Copy link
Collaborator

hricolor commented Nov 5, 2020

Hi, many thanks for all your questions and inputs.

We will check your inputs and provide an answer as soon as possible.

Thank you!

@AJDAKOST
Copy link
Author

AJDAKOST commented Nov 5, 2020

Thank you for your reply and all the answers.

@hricolor
Copy link
Collaborator

hricolor commented Jul 8, 2021

Hi all, (@AJDAKOST , @ec-mcs )

We have been analysing and checking the possibility of adding the requirement window as optional in the criteria proposed above:

• Subcontracting proportion
• For supply contracts: samples, descriptions or photographs without certification of authenticity
• For supply contracts: samples, descriptions or photographs with certification of authenticity
• For supply contracts: certificates by quality control institutes

It could be possible to add a requirement optional by using a cardinality of 0..n. However, it would be useful to continue the analysis if additional information on business needs regarding this addition could be provided. Find below an example with the subcontracted proportion criteria. Note that the cardinality is 0..n to allow the optional use. The element UUID is not provided since it would be provided once agreed on the inclusion.

image

Moreover, we have checked the example pointed out in the first comment of the issue “For supply contracts: certificates by quality control institutes” and it includes a requirement with a cardinality of 1. It means that is required and not optional.

image

Do you think that in this case, it should have a cardinality of 0..n?

@psotofer
Copy link
Collaborator

Hi all, (@AJDAKOST , @ec-mcs )

Could you provide feedback to further work in this issue?
Thank you.

@AJDAKOST
Copy link
Author

AJDAKOST commented Sep 1, 2021 via email

@AJDAKOST
Copy link
Author

AJDAKOST commented Jan 7, 2022

Hello,

I`m very sorry for really late response. Your solution (that in this case, it should have a cardinality of 0..n) is acceptable for us. Thank you very much.

Best regards, Ajda

@psotofer
Copy link
Collaborator

Could you confirm if commented Requirement Group for criterion 'For works contracts: technicians or technical bodies to carry out the work' (work-tech) is alright with a cardinality of 1?
image

@psotofer
Copy link
Collaborator

psotofer commented Feb 1, 2022

Greetings, Could you answer our last question? Thanks.

@AJDAKOST
Copy link
Author

AJDAKOST commented Feb 2, 2022

Hello,

we confirm commented Requirement Group for criterion 'For works contracts: technicians or technical bodies to carry out the work' (work-tech) is alright with a cardinality of 1.

Best regards, Ajda

@acolomer
Copy link
Contributor

acolomer commented Apr 4, 2022

Thank you for your comments. This will be fixed in a future ESPD release.

@AJDAKOST
Copy link
Author

Hi,
we have another question regarding Part IV: Selection criteria, C. Technical and professional ability. At the beginning there is a field “One or more criteria will be weighted”. If the answer is “Yes”, the EO must fulfil “Criterion Weighting Type” and “Provide the general method used to score and evaluate the weighted criteria” (optional field).

Could you please explain what is the purpose of this field on EO's side?

Thank you and best regards,
Ajda

@acolomer
Copy link
Contributor

Good afternoon,
Weighting was removed in ESPD v3.0.0, released on April 2021, and previous versions are no longer maintained.
Kind regards,
The ESPD Team

@AJDAKOST
Copy link
Author

Hi,

Thank you for the clarification.

Best regards,

Ajda

@acolomer
Copy link
Contributor

acolomer commented Jul 8, 2022

Good afternoon,
We thank you for your comments.
Optional requirement section has been added to the criterion 51 with cardinality 0..n. A new UUID has been generated: 75b14cf3-c30f-4b8f-b9ab-549ff5ba595a.
Imagen1
The ESPD-criterion.xml has been generated in a specific branch
This will be released it in the next version.
We therefore close the ticket.
Kind regards,
The ESPD-EDM Team.

@acolomer acolomer closed this as completed Jul 8, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
4 participants
@acolomer @AJDAKOST @hricolor @psotofer