Re: [ubl] Re: Namespace URI string implications

[Mark Leitch <ml@tritorr.com>]

Title: Re: [ubl] Re: Namespace URI string implications

I agree with Jon and Tim on this.  The only ‘blind’ transaction I think is valid is the open request for quotation where the Customer issues an RFQ that any supplier can respond to.  But that is not an interchange, it’s simple a posting to a portal which demands a response in a particular format; thereafter, the formalised interchange takes place.  ‘Blind interchange’ is not a requirement.

Regards, M


Mark Leitch
Director - Tritorr Ltd
tel.:       +44 1932 821112
cell.:      +44 7881 822999
mail:      ml@tritorr.com
skype:    wmarkle
site:       www.tritorr.com


> From: Tim McGrath <tmcgrath@portcomm.com.au>
> Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 08:29:08 +0800
> To: <ubl@lists.oasis-open.org>
> Subject: Re: [ubl] Re: Namespace URI string implications
> 
> 
> jon.bosak@sun.com wrote:
> 
>> Hello UBL TC,
>> The second thing I'd like to say is that I personally believe the
>> notion of blind interchange to be unrealistic.  I simply cannot
>> imagine a real-world business accepting either a purchase order or
>> an invoice without some prior out-of-band agreement (even if it's
>> only a handshake or a phone conversation).  Common B2C portals
>> like amazon.com are not examples of blind interchange, because
>> they enforce the input format through generation of the portal
>> input forms, and they rely upon payment agreements that are far
>> from ad hoc.  If anyone can think of a real-world example of the
>> unconstrained blind interchange of a legally binding business
>> document, I'd like to hear it.  This seems somehow to have become
>> a requirement, but I'm not sure whose it is.
>>  
>> 
> i agree this is not a requirement for UBL, although it did get some 
> mileage in ebXML days.  i also think we don't want this requirement to 
> creep into UBL.
> 
> what we have to remind ourselves is that new technology does not affect 
> the principles of business. the more important requirement is for formal 
> trading relationships to be made more efficient and interoperable with 
> others.
> 
> 
> -- 
> regards
> tim mcgrath
> phone: +618 93352228  
> postal: po box 1289   fremantle    western australia 6160
> web: http://www.portcomm.com.au/tmcgrath
> 
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
> generates this mail.  You may a link to this group and all your TCs in OASIS
> at:
> https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php 
> 
> 
>