Re: [ubl-comment] Re: UBL and UN/CEFACT

[VANDAMME Frank <frank.vandamme@swift.com>]

Dear Jon and all,

As you know from our former discussions,  SWIFT would more than welcome a move of  UBL into the UN/CEFACT organization. As we said
when we joined UBL, SWIFT's main interest is in standards convergence at all levels and it's our strong belief that this purpose is
best served by bringing all relevant initiatives together in one single discussion forum. We believe that - with the new UN/CEFACT
Forum being in place - the UN/CEFACT contains a logical place (namely ATG) to bring the work of UBL (at least the naming & design
rules) to. As far as SWIFT is concerned, such a move would make our resource involvement in this work much more centralized and
efficient and would make it much easier for to remain actively involved.

We sincerely hope that the current discussions will soon lead to such an agreement between all involved parties.

Best regards,
Frank Vandamme

Jon Bosak wrote:

> As chair of the OASIS UBL Technical Committee, I welcome the
> recent message from Ralph Berwanger, Jamie Clark, Klaus-Dieter
> Naujok, and Ray Walker expressing their interest in pursuing a
> closer relationship between UN/CEFACT and the UBL initiative.

Attachment: frank.vandamme.vcf
Description: Card for VANDAMME Frank