-
|
Hello everyone, During the implementation of SDK 1.10.1 we stumbled across the fact that BR-BT-00109-0023 does not always trigger, although the conditions for the error according to fields.json are fulfilled. Specifically, the fields.json for notice subtype 18, for example, states BT-109 is mandatory if it is not forbidden and that it is only forbidden if the duration is shorter than 8 years. If you now enter a duration of 10 years and leave BT-109 empty, the rule does not fire. If BT-113 is also entered, the rule is triggered, although the rule should be independent from BT-113. We suspect that this is related to the fact that the rule context for BR-BT-00109-0023 That means, a contracting authority only knows they are supposed to enter data for BT-109 when the duration exceeds 8 years AND they decide to enter BT-113. Otherwise, they would not receive a validation error and would not know that they violate a rule stipulated in the fields.json. Could you please tell us how to proceed in this case? Many thanks in advance and best regards |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
Replies: 1 comment
-
|
That's correct, the context will exist only if BT-109, BT-111 or BT-113 exists. Context will et updated in SDK 1.12 |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
That's correct, the context will exist only if BT-109, BT-111 or BT-113 exists. Context will et updated in SDK 1.12