1 / 10

UBL JPLSC Report

OASIS UBL TC Brussels Meeting. UBL JPLSC Report. May 22, 2006 Yukinori Saito Vice Chair of OASIS UBL JPLSC Fuji Electric Information Service Co., Ltd. saito-yukinori@fujielectric.co.jp. Recent Activities (F2F Meeting). Discussion about JPLSC’s proposal to UBL TC regarding ECALGA.

matt
Download Presentation

UBL JPLSC Report

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. OASIS UBL TC Brussels Meeting UBL JPLSC Report May 22, 2006 Yukinori Saito Vice Chair of OASIS UBL JPLSC Fuji Electric Information Service Co., Ltd. saito-yukinori@fujielectric.co.jp

  2. Recent Activities (F2F Meeting) • Discussion about JPLSC’s proposal to UBL TC regarding ECALGA. • Mr. Naito (Osaka Institute of Technology) has firstly joined. • Report of UBL TC Hangzhou meeting by Y-Saito. • Introduction of OASIS PPS (Production Planning and Scheduling) TC by A-Kawauchi. • Study of UBL activities, e.g. Development activities to UBL V2.0, Cooperation between UBL and UN/CEFACT, UBL deployment. • Study about differences between UBL and OAGIS. • Study and evaluation of UBL V2.0 specification ’Universal Business Language 2.0 (index.html)’. Then JPLSC have submitted the comments to UBL TC. • Study and evaluation of UBL V2.0 business documents. UBL JPLSC members have shared their working concerning the checking of V2.0 business documents. Then JPLSC have submitted the comments to UBL TC. • Study and evaluation of UBL V2.0 business documents (continued). 10th Meeting (2005.03.17) 11th Meeting (2005.05.25) 12th Meeting (2005.11.11) 13th Meeting (2006.01.06) 14th Meeting (2006.03.11) 15th Meeting (2006.05.24)

  3. Members of JPLSC • * Noboru Itoh Sunbridge Solutions Corp. • * Yukinori Saito Fuji Electric Information Service Co., Ltd. • Chair of B2B-EC framework WG in ECOM • Nobuyuki Sambuichi Hitachi Systems and Services, Ltd. • Shin Takagi Hitachi Systems and Services, Ltd. • Kentaro Ejima Infoteria Corporation • * Hiroshi Naito Osaka Institute of Technology • * Naomasa Hosoda NEC Soft, Ltd. • * Akihiro Kawauchi Process Business Research Institute • * Kunio Ohno Justsystem Corporation • * Keisuke Ueno Japan Petrochemical Industry Association • *: active member ■Chair ■Vice Chair ■Members

  4. Comments to UBL V2.0 business documents (1/4) JPLSC have submitted some comments of UBL V2.0 business documents to UBL TC on March 24, 2006. The followings are some of them. 1. Ordering process 2. Billing, Payment process 3. Transportation process • Many BIE are added comparing V1.0. Approximately 50% BIEs are changed. UBL Names of some BIEs are changed. We don’t know why these are changed. • We think that there are many mistakes and omissions in UML activity diagrams. • There is no description regarding Application Response in UBL V2.0 (index.html). Therefore, we cannot understand how to use or manage the Application Response business document. • There are some use cases descriptions regarding Transportation business process in the section 5.8 “Initiate Transport Service Collaboration” in UBL V2.0 (index.html). • We think that there is a business process that the buyer goes to the supplier to get the ordering Items.

  5. Comments to UBL V2.0 business documents (2/4) 4. Compatibility between V1.0 and V2.0 5. Definitions of Code value • There are many changes in Business Document V2.0 comparing V1.0. We think that UBL V2.0 specification cannot keep downward compatibility to V1.0. • What is a design policy in UBL specifications regarding compatibility among V1.0, V2.0, and next V3.0? • There are many codes in UBL business documents. However, there are very few definitions of Code’s values. In case to use UBL business documents, this would become big problems. • We think that there are two kinds of Codes. One is universal codes, those are defined by some standard bodies. For example: Country Code, Currency Code. The other one is a code that is defined by the trading partners themselves. In case of this kind of trading partner’s defined codes, we would like to have some principles or guidelines regarding the code values. Let me cite an example regarding Code definition in Japanese business documents. There are many business documents in many industries in Japan. These business documents have Code Definitions. The Code Definitions define the meaning of code and definition of code values.

  6. Comments to UBL V2.0 business documents (3/4) 6. The size of Reusable spreadsheet YS: Reusable V1.0 contains 60 ABIEs. And Reusable spreadsheet has 431 items (ABIE, BBIE, ASBIE). This is quite a big size already.The Reusable V2.0 will contain 104 ABIEs. I think that this size is too big to manage. I have no suitable ideas about this issue. Alternative idea is that the Reusable spreadsheet will be divided to two or three peaces physically.TM: Only one "common" spreadsheet sorted in order of "all contexts", "procurement", then "transportation" ABIEs (based on their business process).

  7. Comments to UBL V2.0 business documents (4/4) 7. Provide a reference table between Reusable and business documents YS: Please provide us (UBL users) Reusable ABIEs reference tablethat explains referring business documents and referring Reusable ABIEs by each ABIE.I think that this reference table is a kind of support documents.The attached document is a sample of  Reusable ABIEs reference table. In this document, the key item is ABIEs in reusable. The contents are referring business documents and referring Reusable ABIEs.TM: Provide a reference table as you suggest. Once we have stablized the "common" spreadsheet (following the UBL Plenary meeting on May 22-25) we may ask if the JPLSC can prepare the reference table. Is that reasonable?

  8. Reusables V1.0 Reference table

  9. Related activities concerning UBL in Japan • ECOM (Electronic Commerce Promotion Council of Japan) • ECOM developed a business document named ‘Business document model for the manufacturing domain’ in 2004. This business document is a subset of ECALGA. • 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. • Common XML/EDI Practice Promotion Council • The Common XML/EDI Practice Promotion Council has been established in May, 2004. This council promote next generation common XML/EDI system for not only big enterprises but also SMEs. • This council developed the Common XML/EDI framework standards. • The business document in this Common XML/EDI framework standards is ‘Business document model for the manufacturing domain (ECALGA based)’ and UBL subset.

  10. Common XML/EDI framework will adopt UBL as an international business documents to overseas trading companies. Common XML/EDI framework Big enterprises Big enterprises Big enterprises Push type XML/EDI Push type XML/EDI VAN terminal Industry specific business document, or Business document model for the manufacturing domain Closed network Business document model for the Manu. Internet EDI-ASP Hub server EDI-ASP Hub server Other Hub server VAN server Overseas UBL Subset Business document model for the Manufacturing domain Common XML/EDI framework Push type XML/EDI Push type XML/EDI Medium sized SME Pull type XML/EDI Pull type XML/EDI Small sized SME Small sized SME ・Push type EDI：Sender sends the business document to receiver. Constructed by server computer. ・Pull type EDI： Receiver gets the business document from the sender. Constructed by personal computer.

More Related