Schema, extension metadata and README

[ColinMaudry]

This PR implements the following fields:

• awards/valueCalculationMethod
• contracts/periodRationale
• parties/details/buyerProfile
• contracts/publicPassengerTransportServicesKilometers
• parties/details/url
• tender/reviewDetails
• tender/valueCalculationMethod

These fields are grouped in this extension as they did not group well with other fields.

[ColinMaudry]

When I started working on this extension, I had an uncommited procurementMethodName codelist in the folder. Should it be somewhere else?

Code,Title,Description
open,Open,All interested suppliers can submit a tender
restricted,Restricted,Any economic operator may submit a request to participate in response to a tender but the operators selected by the procuring entity may bid
negotiatedWithCallForCompetition,Negotiated with prior publication of a call for competition,TODO
negotiatedWithoutCallForCompetition,Negotiated without prior publication of a call for competition,TODO
competitiveDialogue,Competitive dialogue,TODO
innovationPartnership,Innovation partnership,TODO
otherSingleStage,Other single stage procedure,TODO
otherMultipleStage,Other multiple stage procedure,TODO

[ColinMaudry]

conctract.periodRationale: Do we use this field specifically for the rationale for the modification of the contract duration (TED F20 semantics are even tighter, it's specifically for FAs) or do we generalize it to the rationale of the contract duration?

If we use the former option, we may rename the field.

[ColinMaudry]

award.valueCalculationMethod: do we keep the same field name as tender.valueCalculationMethod, while

• the semantics of tender.valueCalculationMethod are "Method used for calculating the estimated value of the concession." (OK)
• those of award.valueCalculationMethod are "Any details relevant to the value of the concession according to article 8(3) of the directive of 2014 on concessions" (not specifically about value calculation)

Shall we rename it concessionValueDetails?

[ColinMaudry]

contract.publicPassengerTransportServicesKilometers: the wording of the description in the schema may be improved. Some regulatory material here: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32007R1370#d1e732-1-1 (Article 5, paragraph 4.)

[ColinMaudry]

README: given this extension shelters fields that don't group with others, I didn't really know how to contextualize it legally (# Legal context). This section may be improved.

[jpmckinney]

When I started working on this extension, I had an uncommited procurementMethodName codelist in the folder. Should it be somewhere else?

I don't think the current mapping needs a procurementMethodName codelist anymore.

conctract.periodRationale: Do we use this field specifically for the rationale for the modification of the contract duration (TED F20 semantics are even tighter, it's specifically for FAs) or do we generalize it to the rationale of the contract duration?

Let's generalize it, as the F20 restriction isn't semantically relevant.

award.valueCalculationMethod are "Any details relevant to the value of the concession according to article 8(3) of the directive of 2014 on concessions" (not specifically about value calculation)
Shall we rename it concessionValueDetails?

It's still about calculating/estimating the value of the concession. Article 8(3) starts with: "The estimated value of the concession shall be calculated using an objective method specified in the concession documents. When calculating the estimated value of the concession, contracting authorities and contracting entities shall, where applicable, take into account in particular: …"

[ColinMaudry]

Thanks! I'll improve a bit the wording and the JSON sample, then I'll request your review.

[jpmckinney]

We can merge this PR once comments are resolved, but we should also add the codelist modifications to this extension: open-contracting-extensions/european-union#40