Open APIs

Hi @Ludovic Robert,

I has just gone through the newly released TMF 622 Product Ordering API R19.0.0 ​​and noticed a basic difference in the use of orderItemRelationShip (now productOrderItemRelationship - R19.0.0). Previously in R17.5.1 in example "create product order" the child products under the Bundled product were described to be as child orderItems (i.e. orderItems inside the orderItem of Bundles product) and now in R19.0.0 the approach has been changed with productOrderItemRelationship containing value "bundles" which describes what a productOrderItems a bundled inside this bundle with no sub-level hierarchy of productOrderItems, but still the product order resource in R19.0.0 mentions the same for which I failed to understand the use.

Moreover, I see that approach used in R17.5.1 seems more feasible as we can use the same for UCs where there is a bundle inside a bundle, it will be difficult to represent the same using the approach mentioned in R19.0.0 (though implementable :) )

Please provide your views on same.

R17.5.1 (Child Product of bundle are inside the bundle orderItem )

{
    "id": "30001",
    "@type": "ProductOrder",
    "orderItem": [
        {
            "id": "100",
            "orderItem": [
                     {
                         "id": "110"
                     },
                    {
                        "id": "120",
                        "productOrderItemRelationship": [
                            {
                               "id": "110",
                               "relationshipType": "reliesOn"
                            }
                          ],
                      }
             ],
        }
     ]
]

R19.0.0 (Child Product of bundle are at same level)

{
    "id": "30001",
    "@type": "ProductOrder",
    "productOrderItem": [
        {
            "id": "100",
            "productOrderItemRelationship": [
                    {
                       "id": "110",
                       "relationshipType": "bundles"
                    },
                   {
                       "id": "120",
                        "relationshipType": "bundles"
                    }
             ],
        },
        {
              "id": "110"
        },
       {
              "id": "120",
              "productOrderItemRelationship": [
                   {
                      "id": "110",
                       "relationshipType": "reliesOn"
                   }
               ],
        }
     ]
}

Hi @Ludovic Robert,

I has just gone through the newly released TMF 622 Product Ordering API R19.0.0 ​​and noticed a basic difference in the use of orderItemRelationShip (now productOrderItemRelationship - R19.0.0). Previously in R17.5.1 in example "create product order" the child products under the Bundled product were described to be as child orderItems (i.e. orderItems inside the orderItem of Bundles product) and now in R19.0.0 the approach has been changed with productOrderItemRelationship containing value "bundles" which describes what a productOrderItems a bundled inside this bundle with no sub-level hierarchy of productOrderItems, but still the product order resource in R19.0.0 mentions the same for which I failed to understand the use.

Moreover, I see that approach used in R17.5.1 seems more feasible as we can use the same for UCs where there is a bundle inside a bundle, it will be difficult to represent the same using the approach mentioned in R19.0.0 (though implementable :) )

Please provide your views on same.

R17.5.1 (Child Product of bundle are inside the bundle orderItem )

{
    "id": "30001",
    "@type": "ProductOrder",
    "orderItem": [
        {
            "id": "100",
            "orderItem": [
                     {
                         "id": "110"
                     },
                    {
                        "id": "120",
                        "productOrderItemRelationship": [
                            {
                               "id": "110",
                               "relationshipType": "reliesOn"
                            }
                          ],
                      }
             ],
        }
     ]
]

R19.0.0 (Child Product of bundle are at same level)

{
    "id": "30001",
    "@type": "ProductOrder",
    "productOrderItem": [
        {
            "id": "100",
            "productOrderItemRelationship": [
                    {
                       "id": "110",
                       "relationshipType": "bundles"
                    },
                   {
                       "id": "120",
                        "relationshipType": "bundles"
                    }
             ],
        },
        {
              "id": "110"
        },
       {
              "id": "120",
              "productOrderItemRelationship": [
                   {
                      "id": "110",
                       "relationshipType": "reliesOn"
                   }
               ],
        }
     ]
}

Thank you @Ludovic Robert for the clarity.

Moreover I also wanted to understand that can we also extend the relationship values to add some more, like in a case of upgrading bundles UC (change bundle/plan)? Or we have to use the "ProductRelationShip" for this purpose?
For e.g.
If I have an bundle as below:

Bundle A (Voice & Broadband Bundle)
    - Base Fiber Access
          (Characteristics - Dual Play)

    - ​Voice Bundle (Bundle)
         - Base VoIP Plan

    - Broadband Bundle
         - Base Broadband FTTH Plan

I am upgrading to something like below

Bundle B (Triple Play Bundle)
    - Base Fiber Access
          (Characteristics - Triple Play)

    - ​Voice Bundle (Bundle)
         - Base VoIP Plan

    - Broadband Bundle
         - Base Broadband FTTH Plan

    + TV Bundle
         - Base IPTV Plan

Can I use "relationshipType" value such as "changes" or "reliesOn" from "Base Fiber Access (Triple Play) " orderItem of Bundle B to "Base Fiber Access (Dual Play) " orderItem of Bundle A  as I am upgrading the access for the triple play plan? Or how are these relationships represented in the order structure ?

Hi @Ludovic Robert,

I has just gone through the newly released TMF 622 Product Ordering API R19.0.0 ​​and noticed a basic difference in the use of orderItemRelationShip (now productOrderItemRelationship - R19.0.0). Previously in R17.5.1 in example "create product order" the child products under the Bundled product were described to be as child orderItems (i.e. orderItems inside the orderItem of Bundles product) and now in R19.0.0 the approach has been changed with productOrderItemRelationship containing value "bundles" which describes what a productOrderItems a bundled inside this bundle with no sub-level hierarchy of productOrderItems, but still the product order resource in R19.0.0 mentions the same for which I failed to understand the use.

Moreover, I see that approach used in R17.5.1 seems more feasible as we can use the same for UCs where there is a bundle inside a bundle, it will be difficult to represent the same using the approach mentioned in R19.0.0 (though implementable :) )

Please provide your views on same.

R17.5.1 (Child Product of bundle are inside the bundle orderItem )

{
    "id": "30001",
    "@type": "ProductOrder",
    "orderItem": [
        {
            "id": "100",
            "orderItem": [
                     {
                         "id": "110"
                     },
                    {
                        "id": "120",
                        "productOrderItemRelationship": [
                            {
                               "id": "110",
                               "relationshipType": "reliesOn"
                            }
                          ],
                      }
             ],
        }
     ]
]

R19.0.0 (Child Product of bundle are at same level)

{
    "id": "30001",
    "@type": "ProductOrder",
    "productOrderItem": [
        {
            "id": "100",
            "productOrderItemRelationship": [
                    {
                       "id": "110",
                       "relationshipType": "bundles"
                    },
                   {
                       "id": "120",
                        "relationshipType": "bundles"
                    }
             ],
        },
        {
              "id": "110"
        },
       {
              "id": "120",
              "productOrderItemRelationship": [
                   {
                      "id": "110",
                       "relationshipType": "reliesOn"
                   }
               ],
        }
     ]
}

Thank you @Ludovic Robert for the clarity.

Moreover I also wanted to understand that can we also extend the relationship values to add some more, like in a case of upgrading bundles UC (change bundle/plan)? Or we have to use the "ProductRelationShip" for this purpose?
For e.g.
If I have an bundle as below:

Bundle A (Voice & Broadband Bundle)
    - Base Fiber Access
          (Characteristics - Dual Play)

    - ​Voice Bundle (Bundle)
         - Base VoIP Plan

    - Broadband Bundle
         - Base Broadband FTTH Plan

I am upgrading to something like below

Bundle B (Triple Play Bundle)
    - Base Fiber Access
          (Characteristics - Triple Play)

    - ​Voice Bundle (Bundle)
         - Base VoIP Plan

    - Broadband Bundle
         - Base Broadband FTTH Plan

    + TV Bundle
         - Base IPTV Plan

Can I use "relationshipType" value such as "changes" or "reliesOn" from "Base Fiber Access (Triple Play) " orderItem of Bundle B to "Base Fiber Access (Dual Play) " orderItem of Bundle A  as I am upgrading the access for the triple play plan? Or how are these relationships represented in the order structure ?

Hi @Ludovic Robert,

I has just gone through the newly released TMF 622 Product Ordering API R19.0.0 ​​and noticed a basic difference in the use of orderItemRelationShip (now productOrderItemRelationship - R19.0.0). Previously in R17.5.1 in example "create product order" the child products under the Bundled product were described to be as child orderItems (i.e. orderItems inside the orderItem of Bundles product) and now in R19.0.0 the approach has been changed with productOrderItemRelationship containing value "bundles" which describes what a productOrderItems a bundled inside this bundle with no sub-level hierarchy of productOrderItems, but still the product order resource in R19.0.0 mentions the same for which I failed to understand the use.

Moreover, I see that approach used in R17.5.1 seems more feasible as we can use the same for UCs where there is a bundle inside a bundle, it will be difficult to represent the same using the approach mentioned in R19.0.0 (though implementable :) )

Please provide your views on same.

R17.5.1 (Child Product of bundle are inside the bundle orderItem )

{
    "id": "30001",
    "@type": "ProductOrder",
    "orderItem": [
        {
            "id": "100",
            "orderItem": [
                     {
                         "id": "110"
                     },
                    {
                        "id": "120",
                        "productOrderItemRelationship": [
                            {
                               "id": "110",
                               "relationshipType": "reliesOn"
                            }
                          ],
                      }
             ],
        }
     ]
]

R19.0.0 (Child Product of bundle are at same level)

{
    "id": "30001",
    "@type": "ProductOrder",
    "productOrderItem": [
        {
            "id": "100",
            "productOrderItemRelationship": [
                    {
                       "id": "110",
                       "relationshipType": "bundles"
                    },
                   {
                       "id": "120",
                        "relationshipType": "bundles"
                    }
             ],
        },
        {
              "id": "110"
        },
       {
              "id": "120",
              "productOrderItemRelationship": [
                   {
                      "id": "110",
                       "relationshipType": "reliesOn"
                   }
               ],
        }
     ]
}

Thank you @Ludovic Robert for the clarity.

Moreover I also wanted to understand that can we also extend the relationship values to add some more, like in a case of upgrading bundles UC (change bundle/plan)? Or we have to use the "ProductRelationShip" for this purpose?
For e.g.
If I have an bundle as below:

Bundle A (Voice & Broadband Bundle)
    - Base Fiber Access
          (Characteristics - Dual Play)

    - ​Voice Bundle (Bundle)
         - Base VoIP Plan

    - Broadband Bundle
         - Base Broadband FTTH Plan

I am upgrading to something like below

Bundle B (Triple Play Bundle)
    - Base Fiber Access
          (Characteristics - Triple Play)

    - ​Voice Bundle (Bundle)
         - Base VoIP Plan

    - Broadband Bundle
         - Base Broadband FTTH Plan

    + TV Bundle
         - Base IPTV Plan

Can I use "relationshipType" value such as "changes" or "reliesOn" from "Base Fiber Access (Triple Play) " orderItem of Bundle B to "Base Fiber Access (Dual Play) " orderItem of Bundle A  as I am upgrading the access for the triple play plan? Or how are these relationships represented in the order structure ?

Hi @Ludovic Robert,

I has just gone through the newly released TMF 622 Product Ordering API R19.0.0 ​​and noticed a basic difference in the use of orderItemRelationShip (now productOrderItemRelationship - R19.0.0). Previously in R17.5.1 in example "create product order" the child products under the Bundled product were described to be as child orderItems (i.e. orderItems inside the orderItem of Bundles product) and now in R19.0.0 the approach has been changed with productOrderItemRelationship containing value "bundles" which describes what a productOrderItems a bundled inside this bundle with no sub-level hierarchy of productOrderItems, but still the product order resource in R19.0.0 mentions the same for which I failed to understand the use.

Moreover, I see that approach used in R17.5.1 seems more feasible as we can use the same for UCs where there is a bundle inside a bundle, it will be difficult to represent the same using the approach mentioned in R19.0.0 (though implementable :) )

Please provide your views on same.

R17.5.1 (Child Product of bundle are inside the bundle orderItem )

{
    "id": "30001",
    "@type": "ProductOrder",
    "orderItem": [
        {
            "id": "100",
            "orderItem": [
                     {
                         "id": "110"
                     },
                    {
                        "id": "120",
                        "productOrderItemRelationship": [
                            {
                               "id": "110",
                               "relationshipType": "reliesOn"
                            }
                          ],
                      }
             ],
        }
     ]
]

R19.0.0 (Child Product of bundle are at same level)

{
    "id": "30001",
    "@type": "ProductOrder",
    "productOrderItem": [
        {
            "id": "100",
            "productOrderItemRelationship": [
                    {
                       "id": "110",
                       "relationshipType": "bundles"
                    },
                   {
                       "id": "120",
                        "relationshipType": "bundles"
                    }
             ],
        },
        {
              "id": "110"
        },
       {
              "id": "120",
              "productOrderItemRelationship": [
                   {
                      "id": "110",
                       "relationshipType": "reliesOn"
                   }
               ],
        }
     ]
}

Thank you @Ludovic Robert for the clarity.

Moreover I also wanted to understand that can we also extend the relationship values to add some more, like in a case of upgrading bundles UC (change bundle/plan)? Or we have to use the "ProductRelationShip" for this purpose?
For e.g.
If I have an bundle as below:

Bundle A (Voice & Broadband Bundle)
    - Base Fiber Access
          (Characteristics - Dual Play)

    - ​Voice Bundle (Bundle)
         - Base VoIP Plan

    - Broadband Bundle
         - Base Broadband FTTH Plan

I am upgrading to something like below

Bundle B (Triple Play Bundle)
    - Base Fiber Access
          (Characteristics - Triple Play)

    - ​Voice Bundle (Bundle)
         - Base VoIP Plan

    - Broadband Bundle
         - Base Broadband FTTH Plan

    + TV Bundle
         - Base IPTV Plan

Can I use "relationshipType" value such as "changes" or "reliesOn" from "Base Fiber Access (Triple Play) " orderItem of Bundle B to "Base Fiber Access (Dual Play) " orderItem of Bundle A  as I am upgrading the access for the triple play plan? Or how are these relationships represented in the order structure ?

Hi @Ludovic Robert,

I has just gone through the newly released TMF 622 Product Ordering API R19.0.0 ​​and noticed a basic difference in the use of orderItemRelationShip (now productOrderItemRelationship - R19.0.0). Previously in R17.5.1 in example "create product order" the child products under the Bundled product were described to be as child orderItems (i.e. orderItems inside the orderItem of Bundles product) and now in R19.0.0 the approach has been changed with productOrderItemRelationship containing value "bundles" which describes what a productOrderItems a bundled inside this bundle with no sub-level hierarchy of productOrderItems, but still the product order resource in R19.0.0 mentions the same for which I failed to understand the use.

Moreover, I see that approach used in R17.5.1 seems more feasible as we can use the same for UCs where there is a bundle inside a bundle, it will be difficult to represent the same using the approach mentioned in R19.0.0 (though implementable :) )

Please provide your views on same.

R17.5.1 (Child Product of bundle are inside the bundle orderItem )

{
    "id": "30001",
    "@type": "ProductOrder",
    "orderItem": [
        {
            "id": "100",
            "orderItem": [
                     {
                         "id": "110"
                     },
                    {
                        "id": "120",
                        "productOrderItemRelationship": [
                            {
                               "id": "110",
                               "relationshipType": "reliesOn"
                            }
                          ],
                      }
             ],
        }
     ]
]

R19.0.0 (Child Product of bundle are at same level)

{
    "id": "30001",
    "@type": "ProductOrder",
    "productOrderItem": [
        {
            "id": "100",
            "productOrderItemRelationship": [
                    {
                       "id": "110",
                       "relationshipType": "bundles"
                    },
                   {
                       "id": "120",
                        "relationshipType": "bundles"
                    }
             ],
        },
        {
              "id": "110"
        },
       {
              "id": "120",
              "productOrderItemRelationship": [
                   {
                      "id": "110",
                       "relationshipType": "reliesOn"
                   }
               ],
        }
     ]
}

Thank you @Ludovic Robert for the clarity.

Moreover I also wanted to understand that can we also extend the relationship values to add some more, like in a case of upgrading bundles UC (change bundle/plan)? Or we have to use the "ProductRelationShip" for this purpose?
For e.g.
If I have an bundle as below:

Bundle A (Voice & Broadband Bundle)
    - Base Fiber Access
          (Characteristics - Dual Play)

    - ​Voice Bundle (Bundle)
         - Base VoIP Plan

    - Broadband Bundle
         - Base Broadband FTTH Plan

I am upgrading to something like below

Bundle B (Triple Play Bundle)
    - Base Fiber Access
          (Characteristics - Triple Play)

    - ​Voice Bundle (Bundle)
         - Base VoIP Plan

    - Broadband Bundle
         - Base Broadband FTTH Plan

    + TV Bundle
         - Base IPTV Plan

Can I use "relationshipType" value such as "changes" or "reliesOn" from "Base Fiber Access (Triple Play) " orderItem of Bundle B to "Base Fiber Access (Dual Play) " orderItem of Bundle A  as I am upgrading the access for the triple play plan? Or how are these relationships represented in the order structure ?

Hi @Ludovic Robert,

I has just gone through the newly released TMF 622 Product Ordering API R19.0.0 ​​and noticed a basic difference in the use of orderItemRelationShip (now productOrderItemRelationship - R19.0.0). Previously in R17.5.1 in example "create product order" the child products under the Bundled product were described to be as child orderItems (i.e. orderItems inside the orderItem of Bundles product) and now in R19.0.0 the approach has been changed with productOrderItemRelationship containing value "bundles" which describes what a productOrderItems a bundled inside this bundle with no sub-level hierarchy of productOrderItems, but still the product order resource in R19.0.0 mentions the same for which I failed to understand the use.

Moreover, I see that approach used in R17.5.1 seems more feasible as we can use the same for UCs where there is a bundle inside a bundle, it will be difficult to represent the same using the approach mentioned in R19.0.0 (though implementable :) )

Please provide your views on same.

R17.5.1 (Child Product of bundle are inside the bundle orderItem )

{
    "id": "30001",
    "@type": "ProductOrder",
    "orderItem": [
        {
            "id": "100",
            "orderItem": [
                     {
                         "id": "110"
                     },
                    {
                        "id": "120",
                        "productOrderItemRelationship": [
                            {
                               "id": "110",
                               "relationshipType": "reliesOn"
                            }
                          ],
                      }
             ],
        }
     ]
]

R19.0.0 (Child Product of bundle are at same level)

{
    "id": "30001",
    "@type": "ProductOrder",
    "productOrderItem": [
        {
            "id": "100",
            "productOrderItemRelationship": [
                    {
                       "id": "110",
                       "relationshipType": "bundles"
                    },
                   {
                       "id": "120",
                        "relationshipType": "bundles"
                    }
             ],
        },
        {
              "id": "110"
        },
       {
              "id": "120",
              "productOrderItemRelationship": [
                   {
                      "id": "110",
                       "relationshipType": "reliesOn"
                   }
               ],
        }
     ]
}

Thank you @Ludovic Robert for the clarity.

Moreover I also wanted to understand that can we also extend the relationship values to add some more, like in a case of upgrading bundles UC (change bundle/plan)? Or we have to use the "ProductRelationShip" for this purpose?
For e.g.
If I have an bundle as below:

Bundle A (Voice & Broadband Bundle)
    - Base Fiber Access
          (Characteristics - Dual Play)

    - ​Voice Bundle (Bundle)
         - Base VoIP Plan

    - Broadband Bundle
         - Base Broadband FTTH Plan

I am upgrading to something like below

Bundle B (Triple Play Bundle)
    - Base Fiber Access
          (Characteristics - Triple Play)

    - ​Voice Bundle (Bundle)
         - Base VoIP Plan

    - Broadband Bundle
         - Base Broadband FTTH Plan

    + TV Bundle
         - Base IPTV Plan

Can I use "relationshipType" value such as "changes" or "reliesOn" from "Base Fiber Access (Triple Play) " orderItem of Bundle B to "Base Fiber Access (Dual Play) " orderItem of Bundle A  as I am upgrading the access for the triple play plan? Or how are these relationships represented in the order structure ?

Hi @Ludovic Robert,

I has just gone through the newly released TMF 622 Product Ordering API R19.0.0 ​​and noticed a basic difference in the use of orderItemRelationShip (now productOrderItemRelationship - R19.0.0). Previously in R17.5.1 in example "create product order" the child products under the Bundled product were described to be as child orderItems (i.e. orderItems inside the orderItem of Bundles product) and now in R19.0.0 the approach has been changed with productOrderItemRelationship containing value "bundles" which describes what a productOrderItems a bundled inside this bundle with no sub-level hierarchy of productOrderItems, but still the product order resource in R19.0.0 mentions the same for which I failed to understand the use.

Moreover, I see that approach used in R17.5.1 seems more feasible as we can use the same for UCs where there is a bundle inside a bundle, it will be difficult to represent the same using the approach mentioned in R19.0.0 (though implementable :) )

Please provide your views on same.

R17.5.1 (Child Product of bundle are inside the bundle orderItem )

{
    "id": "30001",
    "@type": "ProductOrder",
    "orderItem": [
        {
            "id": "100",
            "orderItem": [
                     {
                         "id": "110"
                     },
                    {
                        "id": "120",
                        "productOrderItemRelationship": [
                            {
                               "id": "110",
                               "relationshipType": "reliesOn"
                            }
                          ],
                      }
             ],
        }
     ]
]

R19.0.0 (Child Product of bundle are at same level)

{
    "id": "30001",
    "@type": "ProductOrder",
    "productOrderItem": [
        {
            "id": "100",
            "productOrderItemRelationship": [
                    {
                       "id": "110",
                       "relationshipType": "bundles"
                    },
                   {
                       "id": "120",
                        "relationshipType": "bundles"
                    }
             ],
        },
        {
              "id": "110"
        },
       {
              "id": "120",
              "productOrderItemRelationship": [
                   {
                      "id": "110",
                       "relationshipType": "reliesOn"
                   }
               ],
        }
     ]
}

Thank you @Ludovic Robert for the clarity.

Moreover I also wanted to understand that can we also extend the relationship values to add some more, like in a case of upgrading bundles UC (change bundle/plan)? Or we have to use the "ProductRelationShip" for this purpose?
For e.g.
If I have an bundle as below:

Bundle A (Voice & Broadband Bundle)
    - Base Fiber Access
          (Characteristics - Dual Play)

    - ​Voice Bundle (Bundle)
         - Base VoIP Plan

    - Broadband Bundle
         - Base Broadband FTTH Plan

I am upgrading to something like below

Bundle B (Triple Play Bundle)
    - Base Fiber Access
          (Characteristics - Triple Play)

    - ​Voice Bundle (Bundle)
         - Base VoIP Plan

    - Broadband Bundle
         - Base Broadband FTTH Plan

    + TV Bundle
         - Base IPTV Plan

Can I use "relationshipType" value such as "changes" or "reliesOn" from "Base Fiber Access (Triple Play) " orderItem of Bundle B to "Base Fiber Access (Dual Play) " orderItem of Bundle A  as I am upgrading the access for the triple play plan? Or how are these relationships represented in the order structure ?

Hi @Ludovic Robert,

I has just gone through the newly released TMF 622 Product Ordering API R19.0.0 ​​and noticed a basic difference in the use of orderItemRelationShip (now productOrderItemRelationship - R19.0.0). Previously in R17.5.1 in example "create product order" the child products under the Bundled product were described to be as child orderItems (i.e. orderItems inside the orderItem of Bundles product) and now in R19.0.0 the approach has been changed with productOrderItemRelationship containing value "bundles" which describes what a productOrderItems a bundled inside this bundle with no sub-level hierarchy of productOrderItems, but still the product order resource in R19.0.0 mentions the same for which I failed to understand the use.

Moreover, I see that approach used in R17.5.1 seems more feasible as we can use the same for UCs where there is a bundle inside a bundle, it will be difficult to represent the same using the approach mentioned in R19.0.0 (though implementable :) )

Please provide your views on same.

R17.5.1 (Child Product of bundle are inside the bundle orderItem )

{
    "id": "30001",
    "@type": "ProductOrder",
    "orderItem": [
        {
            "id": "100",
            "orderItem": [
                     {
                         "id": "110"
                     },
                    {
                        "id": "120",
                        "productOrderItemRelationship": [
                            {
                               "id": "110",
                               "relationshipType": "reliesOn"
                            }
                          ],
                      }
             ],
        }
     ]
]

R19.0.0 (Child Product of bundle are at same level)

{
    "id": "30001",
    "@type": "ProductOrder",
    "productOrderItem": [
        {
            "id": "100",
            "productOrderItemRelationship": [
                    {
                       "id": "110",
                       "relationshipType": "bundles"
                    },
                   {
                       "id": "120",
                        "relationshipType": "bundles"
                    }
             ],
        },
        {
              "id": "110"
        },
       {
              "id": "120",
              "productOrderItemRelationship": [
                   {
                      "id": "110",
                       "relationshipType": "reliesOn"
                   }
               ],
        }
     ]
}

Thank you @Ludovic Robert for the clarity.

Moreover I also wanted to understand that can we also extend the relationship values to add some more, like in a case of upgrading bundles UC (change bundle/plan)? Or we have to use the "ProductRelationShip" for this purpose?
For e.g.
If I have an bundle as below:

Bundle A (Voice & Broadband Bundle)
    - Base Fiber Access
          (Characteristics - Dual Play)

    - ​Voice Bundle (Bundle)
         - Base VoIP Plan

    - Broadband Bundle
         - Base Broadband FTTH Plan

I am upgrading to something like below

Bundle B (Triple Play Bundle)
    - Base Fiber Access
          (Characteristics - Triple Play)

    - ​Voice Bundle (Bundle)
         - Base VoIP Plan

    - Broadband Bundle
         - Base Broadband FTTH Plan

    + TV Bundle
         - Base IPTV Plan

Can I use "relationshipType" value such as "changes" or "reliesOn" from "Base Fiber Access (Triple Play) " orderItem of Bundle B to "Base Fiber Access (Dual Play) " orderItem of Bundle A  as I am upgrading the access for the triple play plan? Or how are these relationships represented in the order structure ?

Hi @Ludovic Robert,

I has just gone through the newly released TMF 622 Product Ordering API R19.0.0 ​​and noticed a basic difference in the use of orderItemRelationShip (now productOrderItemRelationship - R19.0.0). Previously in R17.5.1 in example "create product order" the child products under the Bundled product were described to be as child orderItems (i.e. orderItems inside the orderItem of Bundles product) and now in R19.0.0 the approach has been changed with productOrderItemRelationship containing value "bundles" which describes what a productOrderItems a bundled inside this bundle with no sub-level hierarchy of productOrderItems, but still the product order resource in R19.0.0 mentions the same for which I failed to understand the use.

Moreover, I see that approach used in R17.5.1 seems more feasible as we can use the same for UCs where there is a bundle inside a bundle, it will be difficult to represent the same using the approach mentioned in R19.0.0 (though implementable :) )

Please provide your views on same.

R17.5.1 (Child Product of bundle are inside the bundle orderItem )

{
    "id": "30001",
    "@type": "ProductOrder",
    "orderItem": [
        {
            "id": "100",
            "orderItem": [
                     {
                         "id": "110"
                     },
                    {
                        "id": "120",
                        "productOrderItemRelationship": [
                            {
                               "id": "110",
                               "relationshipType": "reliesOn"
                            }
                          ],
                      }
             ],
        }
     ]
]

R19.0.0 (Child Product of bundle are at same level)

{
    "id": "30001",
    "@type": "ProductOrder",
    "productOrderItem": [
        {
            "id": "100",
            "productOrderItemRelationship": [
                    {
                       "id": "110",
                       "relationshipType": "bundles"
                    },
                   {
                       "id": "120",
                        "relationshipType": "bundles"
                    }
             ],
        },
        {
              "id": "110"
        },
       {
              "id": "120",
              "productOrderItemRelationship": [
                   {
                      "id": "110",
                       "relationshipType": "reliesOn"
                   }
               ],
        }
     ]
}