Establish mapping between keys in UBC spec and their co-relation with OCPI spec or real world

[DevangMstryls]

We are unable to interpret which property in the protocol schema refers/co-relates to which property in the charging world (OCPI or OCPP).

This will create issues down the line for debugging and customer support if everyone is not on the same page.

Following are the items/entities which need clarity:

Which object/key in the schema refers to,

1. ⁠Charging Station/Location
2. ⁠⁠Charge Point (can be skipped, OCPI doesn't have a Charge Point concept but OCPP does)
3. ⁠⁠Charge Point Connector/EVSE and their connector status(Available, Preparing, Charging, Unavailable, etc)
4. ⁠Charging Session/Charge Transaction
5. ⁠⁠CDRs/Bills
6. ⁠⁠Required charging method and the amount (SoC, Amount(currency), Units, Time)
7. ⁠⁠the need for payment status object within payment went a status update is being sent out right after on_confim call
8. ⁠⁠upload api/CDS api doesn’t follow the beckn specifications of message flow - no message after context available
9. ⁠⁠require to include vehicle type- two wheeler, three wheeler and four wheeler
10. example of BAP led payments
11. within Init include beneficiary as a constraint
12. on_status call example flow where the BPP informs a status change in reservation details due to inability to complete the transaction

@anandp504 @ameetdesh @nirmalnr @nirmalnr @TANMOYDADA

[ameetdesh]

DEG002_Mapping-OCPI-and-Beckn-Protocol-for-EV-Charging-Interoperability.md

Hi @DevangMstryls here is the mapping docs generated by AI. I have not reviewed super carefully, but it smells right. Please cross-check and refine on this. Let me know if any questions.

This is framed after the previous mapping guide.