ubl-psc message
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]
Subject: RE: [ubl-psc] Rationalizing Related Document, Billing Document and Document Reference.
- From: "Sylvia Webb" <swebb@gefeg.com>
- To: <ubl-psc@lists.oasis-open.org>
- Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2005 05:08:58 -0800
Title: Re: [ubl-psc] Rationalizing Related Document, Billing Document and Document Reference.
Mark,
-
I have placed several purchase orders to receive 500
fire extinguishers each week. Back ordered product against
previously placed PO's is to be accumulated and shipped only
when there is a full pallet load.
-
The last four PO's have been shipped short.
-
I receive a Despatch Advice that the backordered fire
extinguishers for two open orders are in transit on a single pallet as
agreed.
-
The shipment arrives and I verify the quantities and
inspect for damage.
-
I return a Receipt advice that references at the
header level the Despatch Advice No., and the two open purchase orders
that the shipment was against.
-
At the detail level, I reference a single line item
with the part number and associated details of the fire extinguisher that was
shipped.
Regards,
Sylvia
From: Mark Leitch
[mailto:ml@tritorr.com]
Sent: Tuesday, December 06, 2005 7:36
AM
To: Sylvia Webb; ubl-psc@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject:
Re: [ubl-psc] Rationalizing Related Document, Billing Document and Document
Reference.
Sylvia,
I’m having trouble understanding your
point, particularly the multiple document references for a single line
item.
Please can you illustrate your points with real
examples.
Thanks, Mark
Mark Leitch
> From:
Sylvia Webb <swebb@gefeg.com>
> Organization: GEFEG
>
Reply-To: <swebb@gefeg.com>
> Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2005 07:17:07
-0800
> To: <ubl-psc@lists.oasis-open.org>
> Subject: RE:
[ubl-psc] Rationalizing Related Document, Billing Document and
> Document
Reference.
>
> From my experience, a Receipt Advice can be related
to multiple previous
> documents. This can be true if any single line item
is a consolidated
> shipment from multiple previous orders. Further,
if the receipt advice is
> only for 1 line item, it is appropriate to have
multiple document references
> at the header level.
>
>
Regards,
> Sylvia
>
> -----Original Message-----
>
From: Peter Larsen Borresen [mailto:plb@itst.dk]
> Sent: Tuesday,
December 06, 2005 6:25 AM
> To: ubl-psc@lists.oasis-open.org
>
Subject: SV: [ubl-psc] Rationalizing Related Document, Billing Document
and
> Document Reference.
>
> Dear all
>
> We
need to take a look at the document references at document level for
>
ReceipAdvice (and perhaps also more documents). Does it give a meaning
on
> document level to have 0..n reference to an order or an despatch
advice.
> From Marks perspective there can only be 0..1, otherwise they
most be on
> line level. Can I correct this?
>
>
/Peter
>
> -----Oprindelig meddelelse-----
> Fra: Tim McGrath
[mailto:tmcgrath@portcomm.com.au]
>
Sendt: 6. december 2005 06:38
> Til: ubl-psc@lists.oasis-open.org
>
Emne: [ubl-psc] Rationalizing Related Document, Billing Document and
>
Document Reference.
>
>
> On Monday's PSC call I was given
the task to rationalize the various ways we
> have used to relate
documents to other documents. This was because it
> appeared that we
had several structures for performing similar functions.
>
> The
main issue was why we had Related Document and Billing Document when
>
both had a similar set of associations. (see attached
>
DocumentreferenceCurrent class diagram)
>
> The way I approached
this was to recognize that we had Invoice Line, Debit
> Line and Credit
Line (aka the Billing Documents) that may reference other
> documents.
We also had Statement Line and Remittance Line (the advisory
>
documents) that may also reference other documents.
>
> My
rationalization (see attached class diagram) was primarily to
rename
> "Related Document" to be "Accounting Document Reference" and
combine this
> with the old "Billing Document" structure. In effect
Accounting Document
> Reference is an extension of Document Reference for
"accounting" documents.
> The qualification of what type of accounting
document is then given by the
> name of the role in the association to
Document Reference.
>
> Some other effects of this were:
> *
"Related Document Line" becomes "Accounting Document Reference Line"
> *
By creating two possible associations to "Accounting Document Reference
>
Line" (one called Debit and one called Credit) we dont need to DebitLine
or
> CreditLine in the Remittance Advice Line or the Statement Line.
This is
> because these documents are reflecting (or summarizing)
the accounting
> transactions of the Accounting Document Reference.
Their 'amounts' are
> duplications of those other values.
> *
Line Reference may associate with either a Document Reference or an
>
Accounting Document Reference.
>
> Overall, this gives us a
symmetry with the way both billing documents and
> advisory documents show
references to other documents and their
> transactions.
>
>
If no-one has any objections to this then perhaps Peter can build it
into
> draft 11 for review of Friday's call?
>
>
> --
> regards
> tim mcgrath
> phone: +618 93352228
>
postal: po box 1289 fremantle western australia
6160
>
> DOCUMENT ENGINEERING: Analyzing and Designing Documents
for Business
> Informatics and Web Services
> http://www.docengineering.com/
>
>
>
>
>
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]