Candidate document type for UBL 1.1 - Certificate of Origin Application

[Tim McGrath <tmcgrath@portcomm.com.au>]

One of the items for the UBL plenary next week is the proposal for the 
inclusion of the Certificate of Origin Application document (COO) into 
the UBL 1.1 library.

Over the past few weeks I have working with CrimsonLogic of Singapore to 
align their COO document closer to UBL.  The background to this project 
was presented at the May UBL Plenary and is available from 
http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/7416/20040624-coml.ppt.

We are at the stage where would like to ask the UBL TC for feedback and 
assistance.  

To this end, i would propose that the UBL TC review the current models 
of the COO document together with its proposed additions to the UBL 
re-usable library.  My feeling is that this shows a typical way in which 
UBL can and will be used (and re-used) for new document types.  So as 
well as producing a useful deliverable the process we go through should 
give us valuable experience in customizing UBL.

The  package is available from the UBL web site 
at...http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ubl/download.php/8703/UBL-COO-091.zip

This package contains an activity model for the business processes 
requiring the COO document, a sample document instance, a proposed 
component model (in UML class diagram form), the proposed COO document 
spreadsheet model and the proposed additions to the UBL re-usable 
spreadsheet model   One of the encouraging things about this exercise is 
how much of UBL 1.0 is re-usable when creating a different type of 
document that is outside the procurement business process.

Obviously, this is still a work-in-progess and there are several things 
we need to do.  For example, this project was originally undertaken on 
behalf of the Asia Pacific Economic Co-operation (APEC) e-Commerce group 
and at the recent APEC forum it was suggested that one of the things we 
need to do is align this with the UNTDED and UN-eDocs work.  

Another requirement is for this document to reference authorized copies 
of other documents.  This re-ignites to issue about digitally signing 
UBL document instances (rather than the envelopes that carry them).  AS 
such it appears to be a real use-case for the auditability described by 
David Burdett in his submission of February 2003 and in the subsequent 
debate summarised by Anne in her email of May 2003 
(http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ubl-ndrsc/200305/msg00016.html). 
 It would be useful to reach a conclusion on this issue.

-- 
regards
tim mcgrath
phone: +618 93352228  
postal: po box 1289   fremantle    western australia 6160