RE: [ubl-lcsc] [Order Response]Re: Getting started on Order Respo nse

["Probert, Sue" <Sue.Probert@commerceone.com>]

Title: RE: [ubl-lcsc] [Order Response]Re: Getting started on Order Response

My reaction is to agree with Mike that Order Response is only for sending any reaction to an earlier message at application level except for amendments and that Order Change should only be used, and be the only document format ever used, for sending amendments.

There are definitely variations across implementations of EDIFACT and I suspect also with X12 and maybe even xCBL as well! If we can reduce any of these variations I believe that we should as every ounce of unnecessary ambiguity that can be removed will be beneficial.

regards

Sue

Sue Probert
Senior Director, Document Standards
Commerce One
Tel: +44 1332 342080
email: sue.probert@commerceone.com

-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Adcock [mailto:Michael.Adcock@apacs.org.uk]
Sent: 10 May 2002 09:23
To: tmcgrath@portcomm.com.au
Cc: ubl-lcsc@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [ubl-lcsc] [Order Response]Re: Getting started on Order
Response

Hi Tim!

The one thing that I baulk at just a little is what UN/EDIFACT ORDRSP
says under 1.3 Principles, " - a proposal of amendment..." I recall that
we ran into a scope and 'business rules' problem with this phrase in
Scandinavia (construction industry), where they insisted on the Order
Response being a confirmation of an order or an order change, with Order
Change going in either direction and being the only means of amending an
order. The seller substituting an item would raise an Order Change, and
the buyer would respond with the confirming order Response.
The Order response is therefore a business confirmation of 'what is'.

I feel we should wait and see what reaction comes from people on the
circulation. So, is there anybody there with a comment, please...

Mike Adcock
Standards & Security Unit
APACS - Association for Payment Clearing Services
Mercury House, Triton Court
14 Finsbury Square
London EC2A 1LQ
Tel: +44 (0) 20 7711 6318
Fax: +44 (0) 20 7711 6299
e-mail: michael.adcock@apacs.org.uk

>>> Tim McGrath <tmcgrath@portcomm.com.au> 10/05/02 09:12:20 >>>
  I think your question relates to the discussion we had with Arofan on

tuesday's call.  Each document needs to be defined in the context of
the
purpose it serves in a business process.  Sally and Frank are fleshing

this out as part of the SCM business process definition.  In the
meantime, we are pushing on using 'common practice' as our guide.

With Order Response i think we agreed it would be the document sent by
a
seller in response to an order (or order change) sent a buyer.  This
fits the xCBL definition "to respond at the application level to an
order or change order that has been received.".  this is consistent
with
the EDIFACT use as well.

To get a better definition of the purpose, i went through the various
documents given in the ebXML Catalog of Common Business Processes for
the Manage Purchase Order business process.  I came up with....

UN/EDIFACT ORDRSP says...
"

1.3    Principles

       - A seller may respond for one or more goods items or services.
      
       - The response may be for a Purchase order or a Purchase order
       change request:
      
       - an acknowledgment of receipt and understanding of data,
      
       - confirmation of acceptance,
      
       - a proposal of amendment,
      
       - a notification of non-acceptance for all or part of the
       message.
      
       - A purchase order response may refer to goods items or
       services related to one or more delivery schedules, call-offs,
       etc.
      
       - A purchase order response for cross-border transactions may
       contain additional information for customs and/or statistical
       purposes.
      
       - A purchase order response may contain details for transport
       and destination as well as delivery patterns.
      
       - A buyer's purchase order may be responded to by one or more
       response messages, according to business practice."

OAG 004 Acknowledge PO says..."The purpose of the ACKNOWLDGE PO
Business
Object Document is to acknowledge receipt of the Purchase Order and to

reflect any changes."

I cant afford the X12 875/876 specs :-(  , but I know from experience
they also cover changing any component within the Order.  So do other
proprietary EDI business processes, such as BISAC in the book
publishing
industry.

I suspect the major difference between Order Response and Order Change

is the direction of the flow (seller->buyer not buyer->seller) and the

contractual obligations associated with that.  It is also likely an
Order Response may need to reference the item or components of the
original Order(s) that this responding to.  For example, "i wish to
substitute product XYZ for ABC on line 23". 

An Order Change is the document used for every modification to goods,
services or conditions that are sent by the buyer to seller after the
original Order. 

An Order Response is the way a seller communicates their ability to
satisfy the conditions of the Order.  As for your example, whilst none

of this is caste in stone, i suggest in common practice, in cases where

prices are being sought, another set of documents (the pre-order set)
are used, i.e. Request for Quote and Quote.

What you have also done is highlight that Order Response can (and
sometime is) used just as a implementation convention response, that is

'you got all the structures and codes right/wrong' - not an application

response at all, in that these are often sent by corporate gateway
systems.  A true Order Response (the one we want to define) is one that

is generated out of the Sales application that says things like 'i have

have checked the stock and my catalog and can supply the
following...'.

Does that make sense?  Can we proceed on this basis?

Michael Adcock wrote:

>H!
>
>At first glance I only have one or two comments, which are attached. I
stress this is very much a first glance!
>
>But it led to a fundamental question: "What do we see the Order
Response as being?"
>
>I think it is simply a confirmation of agreed facts going back from
the supplier to the buyer. Therefore I do not see it as the message in
which the supplier would propose any changes, such as substituting
items, changing the requested delivery date etc. These would be done by
Order Change messages going in either direction, and could be achieved
by (if simple) telephone call or by full messages.
>
>However, if the buyer did not specify prices or a required delivery
date, the Order Response could convey the prices and the offered
delivery date.
>
>SO I think we have some scope discussion/decision to make first. Any
thoughts? Or have I missed this being decided?
>
>regards
>
>Mike Adcock
>Standards & Security Unit
>APACS
>
>- Association for Payment Clearing Services
>Mercury House, Triton Court
>14 Finsbury Square
>London EC2A 1LQ
>Tel: +44 (0) 20 7711 6318
>Fax: +44 (0) 20 7711 6299
>e-mail: michael.adcock@apacs.org.uk
<mailto:michael.adcock@apacs.org.uk>
>
>
>
>**********************************************************************
>The opinions expressed are those of the individual and not the
company.
>  Internet communications are not secure and therefore APACS does not

>     accept legal responsibility for the contents of this message.
>  If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or the
>employee responsible for delivering this communication to the
intended
>recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, distribution
or
>   copying of this communication is strictly prohibited.  If you have
> received this communication in error, please notify us immediately
by
>          teleph
>o
>ne to arrange for its return.  Thank you.
>**********************************************************************
>
> Part 1.1
>
> Content-Type:
>
> text/plain
> Content-Encoding:
>
> quoted-printable
>
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
> OrderResponse-Comment1.doc
>
> Content-Type:
>
> application/msword
> Content-Encoding:
>
> base64
>
>

--
regards
tim mcgrath
fremantle  western australia 6160
phone: +618 93352228  fax: +618 93352142

**********************************************************************
The opinions expressed are those of the individual and not the company.
  Internet communications are not secure and therefore APACS does not 
     accept legal responsibility for the contents of this message.
  If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or the
employee responsible for delivering this communication to the intended
recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, distribution or
   copying of this communication is strictly prohibited.  If you have
 received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by
          telephone to arrange for its return.  Thank you.
**********************************************************************

----------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>