Review the new codes from extensions

[jpmckinney]

EU

Codes were last added in #1225

See extension changelog https://extensions.open-contracting.org/en/extensions/eu/1.1/#changelog

• documentType
• itemClassificationScheme
• partyRole
• relatedProcessScheme

For now, when merging the 1.1 branch of the extension into its 1.2 branch, I omitted these codelist additions and corresponding readme changes.

New extensions

Non-exhaustive

• https://extensions.open-contracting.org/en/extensions/document_publisher/master/codelists/

[odscjen]

Reviewed all extensions maintained by OCDS. Since the last review was completed (#1157) the following extensions have added codes to core codelists:

Extension	Codelist	Codes
EU	+documentType	legislation
	+itemClassificationScheme	eu-vehicle-category
		eu-cvd-contract-type
	+partyRole	procurementServiceProvider
		eSender
		leadBuyer
		leadTenderer
		evaluationBody
		submissionReceiptBody
	+relatedProcessScheme	eu-oj
Document publisher	+partyRole	informationService*
Budget breakdown	+partyRole	sourceParty
Legal basis	+itemClassificationScheme	ELI
Organization classification	+itemClassificationScheme	eu-buyer-legal-type*
		eu-buyer-contracting-type*
		eu-main-activity*
Procurement method rationale classification	+itemClassificationScheme	eu-direct-award-justification
Subcontracting	+partyRole	subcontractor
Withheld information	+itemClassificationScheme	eu-non-publication-justification

codes marked with a * have already been added to 1.2

The new EU specific codes from Organization classification have already been added to classificationScheme.csv, the 1.2 version of itemClassificationScheme, as part of #1622. That was about merging that extension into the core so that doesn't give precedence to also add the EU specific codes from the Procurement method rationale classification, Withheld information and EU in the above table into the core version of classificationScheme.csv. I think they should all remain where they are.

From Legal basis the other 2 codes this extension adds to itemClassificationScheme.csv have already been added to 1.2 so I think this 3rd new code should be as well.

I think all of the partyRole and documentType codes can be merged.

[jpmckinney]

Re: legal basis: once open-contracting-extensions/ocds_legalBasis_extension#11 is merged, legal basis will no longer use that subschema, so we actually want to remove the codes from itemClassificationScheme.

• documentType (EU): OK to add.
• itemClassificationScheme (EU / Procurement method rationale classification / Withheld information): Agree to leave in extensions.
• relatedProcessScheme (EU): Leave in extension. (Not sure if you had an opinion on this one)

partyRole (EU / Document publisher / Budget breakdown / Subcontracting) requires more discussion.

Codes are added in one of two cases. (1) There is a corresponding organization reference. (2) Simply describing a party as having the role serves a use case. The first case covers:

• buyer
• procuringEntity
• supplier
• tenderer
• enquirer
• payer
• payee

The second case is why we have (in the case of parties that might already exist):

• wholesaleBuyer
• notifiedPotentialSupplier

And why we have (in the case of parties that might not have any organization references):

• reviewBody (from 1.1.0 without pull request or changelog entry Updates to organisation handling in OCDS #368)
• interestedParty (from 1.1.4)
• Procedure-related contact points
  • contractImplementationManager
  • informationService
  • mediationBody
  • processContactPoint
  • reviewContactPoint
• PPP-related
  • privateParty
  • equityInvestor
  • leadBank
  • lender

Now if we consider each of the extension codes (not already in 1.2):

• procurementServiceProvider: OK, if we can settle on a clear definition: partyRole codelist: add wholesaleBuyer #1180
• eSender: No. I barely understand the utility in the EU. We only have it for eForms parity.
• leadBuyer: OK
• leadTenderer: OK
• evaluationBody: OK
• submissionReceiptBody: OK
• sourceParty: Not useful without a reference from the field in this extension. We already deprecated 'funder' in 1.2, so there's no need for an unreferenced source party.
• subcontractor: Not useful without a reference from the field in this extension. We need to know which contract the subcontractor is attached to.

When adding new party role codes, add them near similar codes, e.g. order submissionReceiptBody, evaluationBody, then reviewBody and mediationBody, as that matches the timeline of a contracting process. leadBuyer and leadTenderer can follow buyer and tenderer, respectively.

[odscjen]

relatedProcessScheme (EU): Leave in extension. (Not sure if you had an opinion on this one)

I agree that it should just stay in the extension.

Re: legal basis: once open-contracting-extensions/ocds_legalBasis_extension#11 is merged, legal basis will no longer use that subschema, so we actually want to remove the codes from itemClassificationScheme.

Good point!

I agree with your conclusions Re. partyRole codes. For procurementServiceProvider your comment in #1180 (comment)

Since "Procurement service provider" can be divided into more specific roles, I'll also leave it out of OCDS 1.2, despite it being modelled in eForms, because the desired end-state is to have a set of minimally-overlapping roles.

I think still stands, we could attempt to find a definition that would work for OCDS but unless we find evidence that it would be useful outside of the EU then I don't think it's worth it

[jpmckinney]

OK to leave out procurementServiceProvider - thanks for finding that comment :)