Why is BT-50 field mandatory M not CM? #1135
-
|
Dear TED Team, Is the BT-50 field mandatory according to the latest schemes? We see in the Excel table (also in the latest version) that it is marked as an M field and only against Directive 24. This poses a problem for us, as it is unclear why it is mandatory in all cases, rather than as a CM, meaning mandatory only if a reduction in the number of candidates is planned. Currently, the issue is that the minimum number of candidates must be indicated regardless of whether the number of candidates is being reduced to the second stage or not. It is also unclear if there is any validation against the number in the EU OJ? Thank you in advance! Kind regards, Evija Mozga |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
Replies: 3 comments
-
|
Hi, |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Hello, That’s why we're asking— is this indeed intended as a mandatory field according to the SDK schemas? Looking at the SDK 1.13 schema, it appears that the field is not mandatory, but we would still like to understand if any validations are foreseen? From the schema, we understand that BT-50 and BT-51 are mandatory only if the BT-661 indicator is True? Kind regards, EM |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Hi, |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
Hi,
Only few elements are actually required by the schema itself. Existence rules are mainly managed using schematron.
BT-50 is actually mandatory for Notice Subtype 16. There are however some forbidden rules to prevent the specification of BT-50 where not expected. When allowed, it is then mandatory for form (notice subtype) 16 only (i.e. it is not required for other forms).
You could see this more clearly when looking at fields.json lines 23522 and followings.
As this is not an SDK issue, I convert it to a discussion.
KR