Fwd: Re: [ubl-comment] Trying to map my processes to the Ordering process (5.3.3.4.1) in the Draft 2.2 pdf.

[David Goodenough <david.goodenough@broadwellmanor.co.uk>]

As per suggestion below I am forwarding this to ubl-dev. But I have to say that since I subscribed nine days ago, ubl-dev has been entirely quiet.

 

David

 

---------- Forwarded Message ----------

Subject: Re: [ubl-comment] Trying to map my processes to the Ordering process (5.3.3.4.1) in the Draft 2.2 pdf.
Date: Wednesday, 22 November 2017, 10:56:16 GMT
From: Kenneth Bengtsson <kbengtsson@efact.pe>
To: David Goodenough <david.goodenough@broadwellmanor.co.uk>, ubl-comment@lists.oasis-open.org <ubl-comment@lists.oasis-open.org>

Hi David

 

May I suggest you ask your question to the ubl-dev mailing list to see if other UBL users have similar processes and how they may have implemented them? There’s no guarantee that you’ll find an answer. The use case you describe seems rather narrow - to me at least. But you would reach a wider audience than here on the comment list.

 

Best regards,

 

Kenneth

 

 

From: David Goodenough <david.goodenough@broadwellmanor.co.uk>
Date: Wednesday, November 22, 2017 at 5:33 AM
To: "ubl-comment@lists.oasis-open.org" <ubl-comment@lists.oasis-open.org>
Subject: Re: [ubl-comment] Trying to map my processes to the Ordering process (5.3.3.4.1) in the Draft 2.2 pdf.

 

Well according to Wikipedia (and yes I should not believe everything I read there) a Blanket Order requires a forecast, and we do not forecast even the total amount of seed/chemical we will use in a year, let alone which seed/chemicals.

 

Looking at the Order object there is no reason why the supplier can not be the origin, as the buyer and supplier are specified not the sender and receiver. I was really trying to think through the proper process, and to find out whether others had similar arrangements with suppliers that could make a common process.

 

All the narrative in 5.3.3.4.1 (which I understand is only illustrative) suggests a buyer to supplier flow for the Orders. If we did not want an item we would simply ask them to collect it and a credit note would follow, and we never confirm an Order, simply receive it. Another way to look at it would I suppose be that this is a pro-forma Order, and that the response would be a Purchase Order but that introduces an extra step absent from the paper analog, but that is why I am looking for other similar examples of such supplier generated orders to find common patterns.

 

If could also be regarded as an example of Vendor Managed Inventory, but only the initial delivery part. But that process seems to jump straight to the delivery note stage with no Order. In this case, as I suppose we have here, the Order is treated as an internal document for the supplier, and we are just copied in on it for reference.

 

BTW, where is UN CL 1001 defined? It is not one of the genericode files in the 2.2, and google only comes up with dangerous goods classifications (UN1001 being "Acetylene, dissolved"). A while ago I was pointed at some genericode files from 2.0 and 2.1, but these were mainly empty place holders and I can not find this list in there (but I may have missed it).

 

David

 

On Tuesday, 21 November 2017 22:40:04 GMT JAVEST by Roberto Cisternino wrote:

Hello David,
I think you can use the plain UBL Order in your process and use the OrderTypeCode to qualify the type of your order.
The UN CL 1001 is the UN/ECE codelist for document types.
I provide you with a list of common order types, but I think the Blanket Order is what you want:

148    Bailment contract
220    Purchase Order
221    Blanket Order
222    Spot Order
225    Repair order
227    Consignment Order
228    Sample Order
232    Hire order
258    Standing Order

Il 21/11/2017 11:39, David Goodenough ha scritto:

We, like many farms, contract an agronomist to provide us with advice and guidance on the seeds and chemicals that we put on our fields. He, or rather his company, also supply many of those seeds and chemicals. The process runs something like this:-

1) He looks at the growing crops (and our plans for them, and soil maps and last year's yield maps and advice he is getting internally on disease pressure) and comes up with a Plan. This plan involves us doing something to the land and (usually) some chemicals.

2) The plan is turned into two things, a set of tasks for our tractor drivers to perform (usually in the form of an ISOBUS-XML file or its proprietary equivalent) and an Order for chemicals.

3) He passes the Order to us (I suppose this is the Order equivalent of a Self Billed Invoice) and the chemicals are dispatched to us.

4) A Delivery note is delivered along with the chemicals

5) If we decide not to do something - the weather might change and we can not get onto the land to do it in time, some of the chemicals might be returned and they will issue a Collection note.

6) An invoice is issued and from there on all is as one would expect.

The question is how to map the Order from step 3 onto UBL. I suppose it could be represented as a Quotation that we would then have to turn around into an Order and send to them, but their processes assume the Order is placed immediately when they generate it. Their returns policy, which is quick and efficient, makes it work where otherwise it might be open to miss-use. I suppose the possible conclusion might be that we need (and obviously this could not be a 2.2 issue it would have to wait for 2.3) a SelfGeneratedOrder,

or the rules and the flow diagram in 5.3.3.4.1 for an Order need to be extended to say that either end can generate it, but presumably if generated by the vendor then it should at least be accepted by the buyer before being "official".

As it happens the Order arrives in our arable management system electronically

but in a totally proprietary form, and we then can export it in an XML form

to our accounting system.

 
-----------------------------------------