OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

ubl-dev message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]


Subject: Re: [ubl-dev] A 'Lite' Profile for UBL


Stephen,

 ERP systems have selected OAGi BODs for this - not UBL-lite.

 This brings up a bigger issue.  OAGi BODs contain different and extended
 information structures that may or may not map well to the UBL equivalence.
 Where there is a loss of information richness - that is obviously a
problem.

 While trying to define a lowest common functional set is useful (aka EDI
did
 this) - the loss of flexibility is what XML is supposed to be solving.  So
 standing on the high ground and saying 'our stuff is better' - may be a
 honset feel-good factor - unfortunately the world works around business
 needs and business drivers.

 OAGi have learned to support this through their user extension areas in the
 transactions.  However - this only partly ameloriates the problems - since
 the semantics are missing.

 This is the difference between raw data - and information.

 By augmenting the exchange with things like CAM templates and registry
 vocabularies - you can significantly enhanced the exchange - not just of
raw
 data - but the intent, purpose and context to provide meaning and
 information.

 Thanks, DW

>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Stephen Green" <stephen_green@bristol-city.gov.uk>
> To: ">" <<ubl-dev@lists.oasis-open.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, August 24, 2004 11:17 AM
> Subject: Re: [ubl-dev] A 'Lite' Profile for UBL
>
>
> > Our method is to develop a xml schema that has
> > only the things we want to map and with a xsl make a transformations or
> > build a class to work with the UBL message itself. The decision depends
on
> > how the ERP works.
>
> Mmm. Your solution seems to be to create a subset for each and every ERP.
>
> I hope that in this day and age we can do better than that.
>
> What happens when a user of one ERP wants to send a document to a user
> of another? The idea is that electronic invoices, say, should be such that
> my ERP
> can send one to yours without me having to know what ERP you use, only
that
> your system can handle UBL Lite, say. Then if you change your system you
> don't
> have to ask or, eventually, even tell me about it. You can just register
it
> somewhere
> that you can receive UBL Lite invoices and orders once your ERP adds
> functionality
> to support them or you can obtain a plug-in or ASP service which
integrates
> with
> your application. This is, I believe, what we are trying to achieve (in a
> similar way to
> EDI but without the high costs). Maybe there is some way yet but I believe
> it is doable.
>
> If a particular ERP has problems with the Lite profile, the profile should
> be tailored
> such that it minimises the investment required of that company (and passed
> on to
> its customers perhaps) to change its system a little or build in
> adaptations. One way
> to achieve this is to closely align with best practise such as that
defined
> by companies
> like PWC and those which are generally acceptable in most countries.
> Invoices and
> orders have the advantage that they've been around so long and are so
> prevalent
> that everyone has a similar understanding of them and similar laws
covering
> them
> - yes with a few, but not many discrepancies, which appear to be
relatively
> simple
> to work around. Bigger problems are found in the other layers of the stack
> such
> as encryption requirements but as time goes on there may be
rationalisation
> of these
> too. The technology is new perhaps but not the underlying message.
>
> All the best
>
> Steve
>
>
>
>
>



[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]