Question regarding rule BR-BT-00538-0130 - BT-538 value UNKNOWN not allowed for Contract Award Notices

[Fynnyan]

Hello

I got a question regarding the rule BR-BT-00538-0130 - BT-538 value UNKNOWN not allowed for Contract Award Notices.

If 'Form type' (BT-03) is 'Result', then 'Other duration' (BT-538) must be different from 'Unknown' (ruleId: BR-BT-00538-0130)

This business rule seems strange and against the allowed and documented cases in plannedPeriodSection.

There is no mention that the UNKNOWN value for BT-538 is not allowed for Contract Award Notices (we use forms 29, 30) but can be used for Contract Notices (we use forms 16, 17).

Also, regarding the flow, it's allowed to set that value for a CN but not for the later CAN Result seems wrong.
During my research for the case I found no explanation why this is not allowed.

So to me, the assertion in the validation-stage-5.sch seems not up to date, incorrect.

<assert id="BR-BT-00538-0130" role="ERROR" diagnostics="BT-538-Lot" test="not(cbc:DescriptionCode/normalize-space(text()) = 'UNKNOWN') or (not(../../../cbc:NoticeTypeCode/@listName = ('cont-modif','dir-awa-pre')) and not(../../cbc:ID/normalize-space(text()) = ../../../ext:UBLExtensions/ext:UBLExtension/ext:ExtensionContent/efext:EformsExtension/efac:NoticeResult/efac:LotResult/efac:TenderLot/cbc:ID[../../cbc:TenderResultCode/normalize-space(text()) = 'selec-w']/normalize-space(text())))">rule|text|BR-BT-00538-0130</assert>

Documentation:

P.S.: currently, we are using the SDK version 1.12.

[julemari]

Good morning,
The reason for the rule "BR-BT-00538-0130" is that at the level of a contract award notice, where at least one contract was signed, it should not be possible that the duration of this contract is unknown. However, please let us know in case you can think of a situation, where it would still be necessary to use "unknown" for BT-538 at a CAN level. Thanks a lot.

[Fynnyan]

Hello @julemari

I'm sorry for the late answer. Didn't see the notification.

When submitting an award, at that point in time, there might not be a signed contract only the announcement that company X won tender y.

In our case, most of the time the singing of the contracts happens after the announcement for the award.
So the period still might change or be decided while working on the contract.

Also per Swiss Law, according to the Business, this is not a mandatory information, so it's up to the buyer to publicly announce it.

I find it that it's not clear that the "Planned Period" in the CAN case is to represent the contract period. This in regard to the "Settled Contract" information that is available for a CAN.

So my takeaway is to omit the "Planned Period" for awards that fall in that category.

maybe you could update your documentation as it's not clear that this is the case when looking at the SDK validation rules or the eForms SDK documentation.

Thanks for your feedback.