Thanks Tim for reaching out to the CEN/BII people.
We are implementing electronic ordering and invoicing with one of our suppliers. They gave us the option of using an XML standard or EDIFACT.
On the selling side we implemented all our exchanges (orders, responses, invoices, shipments) using EDIFACT - in the past 3 years, (with one exception where we did OpenTrans XML).
For the buying side we choose to use UBL - instead of Ariba cXML although a lot of suppliers have adopted cXML (I am not sure whether that is true!?) .
Of course with the roll-out of Ariba eprocurement at several large buyers many suppliers have been forced to implement cXML and this increases the population of suppliers that adopted electronic ordering based on cXML.
What made me consider choosing UBL is that UBL - UN/CEFACT - ISO20022 / all of these are built on - at least they committed / underscribed - the use of a common semantic data model. And with the large adoption of UBL in Scandinavian countries and the rest of Europe (UN/CEFACT did not make it as a message standard - or did it - not in my view of the past 8 years / but YES it did as the semantic data model) in the public sector a lot of suppliers have also been forced or are in the middle of the process to implement UBL.
If you speak about the public sector then you cannot ignore PEPPOL and CEN/BII, and because a lot of work has been done there it is wise to look at their guidelines and core models. That is what I am doing while defining our message content. However this does not mean that we are taking over all of their proposed syntax mappings.
One of the reasons why I am questioning whether we should use DeliveryAddress or DeliveryLocation / DeliveryParty (as proposed in the CEN/BII Core and Generic Order but also in NESUBL and OIOUBL).
Using ConsigneeCustomerParty would have been more in line with BuyerCustomerParty or SellerSupplierParty. According to the CEN/BII Glossary: Seller and Buyer are roles / Supplier and Customer are partners. Consignee is also described as a role. That is why I believe using DeliveryParty would be more appropriate and then use the PhysicalAddress and PostalAddress within the class Party.
In the Dutch version of UBL I see they propose to use DeliveryAddress (- we are not developing a country local message standard / we have facilities in Europe and the US which need to be accomodated in time).
Being able to handle subcontracting is one of the main requirements for the message we are developing.
All - what is your opinion and / or how have you dealt with this - not in the public sector but in manufacturing environments ?
regards
Danny
From: Tim McGrath <tim.mcgrath@documentengineeringservices.com>
To: Danny Gaethofs <dgaethofs@yahoo.com>
Cc: UBL-Dev <ubl-dev@lists.oasis-open.org>; "'jostein.fromyr@edisys.no' Frømyr" <jostein.fromyr@edisys.no>
Sent: Thursday, September 12, 2013 2:12 AM
Subject: Re: [ubl-dev] DeliveryLocation & DelivertyParty
Some good questions but they appear to be aimed at BII rather than UBL in general.
I will copy in the BII chair so he can pass this on to that group.
Jostein,
Danny has posted this to the UBl-dev mailing list but I think your group may have the better response.
On 11/09/2013, at 10:50 PM, Danny Gaethofs wrote:
Dear all,
The CEN/BII guidelines says:BII uses Delivery Location (rather than Delivery Address) to specify a point of Delivery.
The Delivery Party is the business party who is responsible for receiving the, and taking legal ownership of
the delivered Item. The Postal Address or Physical Location of the Delivery Party cannot be assumed to be
the point to which the Delivery is to be made; the latter is described in Delivery Location.
An example is given of the hospital where the goods are delivered to a private citizen.
Here the hospital is the DeliveryParty and the private citizen the DeliveryLocation.
I am wondering how do you use the DeliveryLocation and DeliveryParty when the legal owner is the same as the recipient ?
Do you then use DeliveryParty.PhysicalLocation ?
How do you handle subcontracting ?
When you order component with a vendor
that need to be shipped to another vendor that applies additional value added work on the item (for example painting or coating) how to you deal with DeliveryParty and DeliveryLocation .
D consider the DeliveryParty to be your own organization and the DeliveryLocation the address of the second vendor ?
Do you know whether CEN/BII - PEPPOL is able to handle DeliveryAddress instead of DeliveryLocation and DeliveryParty ?
Some countries have or are implementing DeliveryAddress instead of the prefered DeliveryLocation and DeliveryParty.
regards
Danny
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail:
ubl-dev-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.orgFor additional commands,
e-mail:
ubl-dev-help@lists.oasis-open.org