Re: Comments to UBL SBS and UBP by JPLSC

["Yukinori Saito" <saito-yukinori@fujielectric.co.jp>]

Dear Stephen Green,
Thank you very much for your reply.
I understand your answers.
I don't know whether SBSC will develop next SBS version (for example: V2.0)
or not.
If SBSC will develop next SBS version, I think that it will be better to
consider our JPLSC's comments. For example: SBS business documents
(including reusable ABIEs) will add some BIEs which are pointed out by our
mapping study.
Best Regards,
Yukinori Saito

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Stephen Green" <stephengreenubl@gmail.com>
To: "Yukinori Saito" <saito-yukinori@fujielectric.co.jp>
Cc: <stephengreenubl@gmail.com>; "Monica J. Martin" <Monica.Martin@sun.com>;
"Noboru Itoh" <nitoh@attglobal.net>; <kueno@iea.att.ne.jp>;
<naitoh@is.oit.ac.jp>; "Dale Moberg" <dmoberg@cyclonecommerce.com>; "UBL
JPLSC" <ubl-jplsc@lists.oasis-open.org>
Sent: Thursday, July 06, 2006 8:37 PM
Subject: Re: Comments to UBL SBS and UBP by JPLSC


Saito-San

Many thanks for such detailed comments. These are of great interest
with regard to SBSC development. Of course, I hope you will consider
whether to submit these to UBL formally. At present I take it that these
are submitted for my perusal only until I hear otherwise from you.

I will try to answer some of the questions (not official answers, just my
own):

Questions
Scope of SBS adoption
     Who are users of SBS?

I believe they will be software developers and project managers developing
e-solutions for small businesses who trade with other small businesses and
with larger businesses


     Which described below is a suitable scope regarding SBS adoption?

SBS will be used by a small business which is conducted by within SMEs
(Small and Medium sized enterprises) only.
SBS will be used by a small business which is conducted by not only
within SMEs (Small and Medium sized enterprises), but also between
large enterprises and SMEs.

Both of these are considered and the SBS package seeks to provide for both
but the main consideration is not the larger but the smaller business who
need
to keep the costs of development to a minimum and may not be already using
elaborate and expensive (to maintain) EDI solutions. Primarily the
consideration
is to cater for those who are moving to UBL not from EDI but from
paper-based
systems (paper invoices and orders input manually into low-end and bespoke
business applications).


Methodologies to develop SBS from UBL
 SBS is a subset of fullset UBL.

     What is a methodology or algorism to develop SBS from UBL?

Is the methodology or algorism (to have developed SBS) based on some
research or investigation?

Yes, there has been much research in the area of conversion of paper-based
procurement systems (invoice and order based) to electronic equivalents.
Some
of the work on which the SBS was based was done by PriceWaterhouse Coopers
for the EU Commission and also considered was the similar study by APEC.
Particular consideration was given to feedback in UBL from members (such as
yourself) and liaisons such as PWC and from early adopters of UBL and
Government Offices standardising on UBL. All these gave the same message,
that
small businesses needed the identification of a core subset and
special treatment
to ensure that the subset could be used by as many as possible and with as
little difficulty as possible.


Remarks: Methodologies to develop Manufacturing SMS business document
in ECOM, Japan.

ECOM has researched the current operational business documents (Order)
using by some big enterprises in Japan. The number of the big
enterprises is 17 companies. By evaluating and summarizing these
business documents, ECOM has developed Manufacturing SME business
document. Therefore, the scope to use this Manufacturing SME business
document is e-businesses not only within SMEs, but also between big
enterprises and SMEs.


Yes, this is an important comment and it may be that the next thing to
address
within UBL is the need to provide for larger businesses too who still cannot
be
expected to cater in their software for all of UBL. That was out of
scope for the
SBSC except that we sought to provide some of the first attempt mechanisms
for defining subsets which might be resued for suchuse cases too.


Regarding the observation of no diagrams in the UBP, I personally didn't see
the need for these as the processes were in most cases just a single message
(deliberately so, to allow virtually everyone to use these same processes
and
if they needed to ellaborate then they could do so be combining the atomic
processes and adding choreography, etc in the Collaborations, etc).

I personally regard the BPSS 2.0.3 as a key way to identify the party's
desire
to limit trade to the subset so that they can be sure to receive only
messages
which take the their limits of catering for just the subset into
account. I suppose
that this would apply not just to the SBS but to any use of subsets, unless
a new namespace has been created to distinguish subset use (which I think is
less than optimal for use of available software). Maybe in time there
will be some
recognition of these things by users of ebXML in general. I do wonder what
is
being used in the meantime and how the features compare with use of BPSS.


Thanks you very much Saito-san and JPLSC for these comments. I eagerly
wait to see how these matters will develope with time.

All the best

Stephen Green



On 06/07/06, Yukinori Saito <saito-yukinori@fujielectric.co.jp> wrote:
> Dear Stephen Green
> Dear Monica J. Martin
>
> We (UBL JPLSC) have held F2F meeting on May 24, 2006 in Tokyo.
> We discussed about your inquiry about UBL SBS and UBP at this F2F meeting.
> We decided to study UBL SBS and UBP by ourselves in JPLSC members.
> We studied UBL SBS and UBP by ourselves in JPLSC members.
> I send you our studied comments by the attached documents.
> If you have any questions or comments, please let us know.
> Best Regards,
> Yukinori Saito
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Stephen Green" <stephengreenubl@gmail.com>
> To: "Yukinori Saito" <saito-yukinori@fujielectric.co.jp>; "Monica J.
Martin"
> <Monica.Martin@sun.com>
> Cc: "Noboru Itoh" <nitoh@attglobal.net>; <kueno@iea.att.ne.jp>;
> <naitoh@is.oit.ac.jp>; "Dale Moberg" <dmoberg@cyclonecommerce.com>; "UBL
> JPLSC" <ubl-jplsc@lists.oasis-open.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2006 3:12 AM
> Subject: Re: [ubl] Re: Report of JPLSC
>
>
> Greetings Saito-San
>
> If you would like any help to produce BPSS 2.0 (ebBP) definitions for
> the ECOM's UBL subsets similar to those I produced for the SBS
> or if you've questions about it I'd be more than happy to help.
>
> The UBP stands for Universal Business Process and is a name we
> gave to the BPSS definitions we designed applying the standard
> UMM patterns to each of the UBL subsets we produced (such
> as Notification for Invoice, Despatch Advice, etc and something
> a little more complex for Order + OrderResponse, etc). We also
> generated template CPAs for folk to use with minimal editing with
> these ebBP definitions. The package is included as support
> directories in the UBL 1.0 SBS package. The ebBP TC also has
> links to the two directories (one for the process definitions and one
> for the CPA templates and some examples) on the TC home page.
> There was a formal collaboration to produce them between UBL
> TC/SBSC and ebBP TC.
>
> I think it would be great if the same thing could be provided for the
> Japanese SME subsets and if this could lead to an ECOM use
> of the BPSS 2.0 and statement to that effect it would be excellent.
> Let me known if there's anything I can do to help. It might also
> act as a good opportunity to compare the SBS with your subset
> work.
>
> All the best
>
> Stephen Green
> UBL SBSC Chair,
> UBL / ebBP Liaison
>
>
> On 16/05/06, Monica J. Martin <Monica.Martin@sun.com> wrote:
> >
> > >>Saito san: Dear Monica J. Martin,
> > >>Thank you for your inquiry.
> > >>What is "UBP"?
> > >>Is UBP a UBL SBS 1.0?
> > >>
> > >mm1: Universal business processes (UBP) are modular process definitions
> > >included as part of the UBL SBS v1.0 and approved as a Committee
> > >Specification. They support ebBP (ebXML BPSS) v2.0.x and utilize the
SBS
> > >business documents. Stephen Green participates in UBL and ebBP. Thanks
> > >and look forward to hearing from you.
> > >
> > >See at
> http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/tc_home.php?wg_abbrev=ebxml-bp
> > >(under Working ebBP Process Definition and Business Signal Examples).
> > >
> > >
> > mm2: Yukinori, it would be great if ECOM can apply its UBL related
> > subset to a set of process definitions similar to UBP. I encourage you
> > to review the Universal Business Processes at the location provided
> > (that links back to UBL). We feel the capability to take these process
> > definition, building blocks to compose to support key domains is very
> > important to the adoption of UBL and ebBP. We look forward to hearing
> > from you soon. I may also note that ebBP is moving to OASIS Standard. If
> > ECOM is interested in greating sample UBL for your subset, those could
> > be valuable as examples for other interested user communities or early
> > adopters, and could serve as one of our supporters [1] as required for
> > OASIS standardization. I truly believe we have the same goal in mind -
> > to enable eBusiness for SME, across the world.  Thanks, Yukinori for the
> > information and your interest.
> >
> > [1] Creating your own process definitions using the UBP concept, ebBP
> > v2.0.3 and UBL (and your subset) are actually sufficient for an
> > implementation reference. We do have a draft open source tool at:
> > http://sourceforge.net/projects/freebxmlbp
> >
> > >>We are interest in subset of UBL.
> > >>As I said in "Related activities concerning UBL in Japan" in my
> presentation
> > >>PPT file, ECOM did mapping study from 'Business document model for
the
> > >>manufacturing domain (ECALGA based)' to UBL in 2004.
> > >>In this mapping studying process, ECOM developed a UBL subset for
> > >>e-business between SMEs and big enterprises in Japan.
> > >>This ECOM's activity is similar to UBL SBS approach.
> > >>However, we did not check or evaluate UBL SBS 1.0, yet.
> > >>
> > >>Best Regards,
> > >>Yukinori Saito
> > >>
> > >>----- Original Message -----
> > >>From: "Monica J. Martin" <Monica.Martin@Sun.COM>
> > >>To: "Yukinori Saito" <saito-yukinori@fujielectric.co.jp>
> > >>Cc: "Noboru Itoh" <nitoh@attglobal.net>; <kueno@iea.att.ne.jp>;
> > >><naitoh@is.oit.ac.jp>; "Dale Moberg" <dmoberg@cyclonecommerce.com>;
> "Stephen
> > >>Green" <stephengreenubl@gmail.com>
> > >>Sent: Tuesday, May 16, 2006 12:36 AM
> > >>Subject: Re: [ubl] Re: Report of JPLSC
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>Yukinori,
> > >>Given the progress for v2.0 and the approval of UBL SBS 1.0 with the
> > >>Universal Business Processes, is there Japanese interest in UBP?
Thanks.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>saito: Dear Mavis Cournane,
> > >>>I send you my presentation PPT file 'UBL JPLSC Report' as an attached
> > >>>document.
> > >>>I will attend at the Opening plenary of UBL TC Brussels meeting
around
> the
> > >>>time of 9:30 to 12:00 (Brussels local time) on May 22 (Monday), by
> > >>>telephone.
> > >>>I will make presentation using this attached PPT file at the time.
> > >>>Best Regards,
> > >>>Yukinori Saito
> > >>>(Vice Chair of UBL JPLSC)
> > >>>-------------------------------------------
> > >>>Yukinori Saito
> > >>>Fuji Electric Information Service Co., Ltd. (FIS)
> > >>>e-mail: saito-yukinori@fujielectric.co.jp
> > >>>Tel: +81-3-5435-7333     Fax: +81-3-5435-7513
> > >>>-------------------------------------------
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>