Wrong xpath OPT-081-LotResult

[JanEmde]

We have found that the xpathAbsolute for the OPT-081-LotResult field is incorrect.
The code incorrectly specifies that the value ‘nrg-sav-yr’ is selected:

/*/ext:UBLExtensions/ext:UBLExtension/ext:ExtensionContent/efext:EformsExtension/efac:NoticeResult/efac:LotResult/efac:StrategicProcurement[efac:StrategicProcurementInformation/efac:ProcurementDetails/efbc:AssetCategoryCode/@listname='energy-efficiency-item']/efac:StrategicProcurementInformation/efac:ProcurementDetails/efac:AssetMetric[efbc:AssetMetricCode/text()='nrg-sav-yr']/efbc:AssetMetricCode

This makes it impossible to select the other code from the code list "metric-type".

In our opinion, the correct xpathAbsolute would be:

/*/ext:UBLExtensions/ext:UBLExtension/ext:ExtensionContent/efext:EformsExtension/efac:NoticeResult/efac:LotResult/efac:StrategicProcurement[efac:StrategicProcurementInformation/efac:ProcurementDetails/efbc:AssetCategoryCode/@listname='energy-efficiency-item']/efac:StrategicProcurementInformation/efac:ProcurementDetails/efac:AssetMetric/efbc:AssetMetricCode

[YvesJo]

Hi,
Two different dedicated parent nodes have been defined for OPT-081 and OPT-080. Both fields have different meaning and different rules apply. OPT-081 is about energy savings and can not be associated with the other code.

[YvesJo]

for differentiation:

            <efac:ProcurementDetails>
                <!--  BT-811(b)-LotResult : "EED List (Item)"  -->
                <efbc:AssetCategoryCode listName="energy-efficiency-item">wa-pu</efbc:AssetCategoryCode>
                <!--  BT-811(a)-LotResult : "EED List (Basis)"  -->
                <efbc:LegalFrameworkCode listName="energy-efficiency-basis">eco-des</efbc:LegalFrameworkCode>

                <efac:AssetMetric>
                    <!--  OPT-080-LotResult : "Consumption Metric"  -->
                    <efbc:AssetMetricCode listName="metric-type">nrg-con-yr</efbc:AssetMetricCode>
                    <!--  BT-813-LotResult : "Energy Consumption in kWh/year"  -->
                    <efbc:AssetMetricNumeric>140000</efbc:AssetMetricNumeric>
                </efac:AssetMetric>

                 <efac:AssetMetric>
                    <!--  OPT-081-LotResult : "Savings Metric"  -->
                    <efbc:AssetMetricCode listName="metric-type">nrg-sav-yr</efbc:AssetMetricCode>
                    <!--  BT-814-LotResult : "Energy Savings in kWh/year"  -->
                    <efbc:AssetMetricNumeric>25000</efbc:AssetMetricNumeric>
                </efac:AssetMetric>

               <efac:StrategicProcurementStatistics>
                    <!--  BT-815-LotResult : "Energy Efficiency Quantity"  -->
                    <efbc:StatisticsNumeric>100</efbc:StatisticsNumeric>
                </efac:StrategicProcurementStatistics>
            </efac:ProcurementDetails>

in their absence we wouldn't be able to identify what the values in efbc:AssetMetricNumeric are actually for (i.e. is it for BT-813 or for BT-814?)

[JanEmde]

Ah, now I get your point. But wouldn't it be much easier to use specific xpaths for BT-813 and BT-814?

For example:
<efac:AssetMetricConsumption >140000</efac:AssetMetricConsumption>
and
<efac:AssetMetricSavings>25000</efac:AssetMetricSavings>

Background: With the current solution, we have to build an exception when creating forms with the metadata-driven approach in order to hide the fields OPT-080 and OPT-081 that are not usable and confusing for users.

These types of exceptions (and the maintenance effort they require) make the use of the metadata-driven approach unattractive.

[YvesJo]

The principles of reusability and extensivity have to be respected to have a stable schema.
Following UBL design rules also increases the probability of getting the construct as part of the standard.
Unfortunately, the proposed option does not satisfy the previous requirements.

[JanEmde]

@YvesJo Okay, but shouldn't the fields at least be hidden?

[YvesJo]

These will be hidden with SDK 1.14