Practical Universal Business Language Deployment

[Accessibility conventions are described at the bottom of the page]

1. OASIS Universal Business Language (UBL)
[> 1.1][> 2.][^^^]
1.1 OASIS Universal Business Language (UBL)
[> 1.2][< 1.][^^][^^^]
1.1.1 OASIS Universal Business Language (UBL)
[> 1.1.2][> 1.2][> 2.][< 1.][^^][^^^]
UBL is an international effort to develop open royalty-free standards for the machine-processing of business information
[[1] - the UBL committee has worldwide committee membership
[[2] - vendor members
[2] - consultant and trainer members
[2] - business expert and user members
][1] - there are worldwide deployments active or in the works
[1] - the intellectual property is owned by the Organization for the Advancement of Structured Information System (OASIS)
[[2] - [http://www.oasis-open.org/who/intellectualproperty.php]
[2] - UBL is licensed under "RF on Limited Terms"
[[3] - limiting the contributors' IP obligations, not the users' ability to use
[3] - as a requirement of membership all developers and participants in the technical committees transfer the intellectual property of their contributions to the organization
][2] - [http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ubl/200610/msg00047.html]
[2] - the intellectual property is not tied up by any one vendor or user
]]
Entry point for e-commerce for small- and medium-sized businesses
[[1] - inevitably to be used by large businesses as well due to mandated requirements by large users and governments
]
Supplants the need to use existing or develop one's own proprietary electronic format
[[1] - proprietary software is under the control of a vendor or the software developer
[1] - proprietary formats have limited (if any) interoperability with systems created by other vendors
[1] - no leverage of available implementations for re-use
]
Opportunity to move quickly from business process modeling to active messaging
[[1] - use your own methods to determine your own business processes
[1] - when done map your information model components to off-the-shelf UBL business objects
[1] - utilize off-the-shelf UBL document models for information interchange in the modeled business process
[1] - customization approaches provide for unique requirements
]
UBL is designed to eliminate re-keying of data
[[1] - supplant existing fax- and paper-based supply chains
]
[Figure 1.1: Paper-based business transactions
Two similar but different stacks of figures are presented, the sender stack on the left and the receiver stack on the right. Each stack depicts, from top to bottom, differing business practices, data model and application.
The sender's application is connected to a printer printing off a business document, which is transferred to the receiver's application showing the document being either scanned or entered using data entry to the receiver's application.
]
The sender prepares a business document for sending:
[[1] - the information components of the sender's business practices are expressed in a data model supporting the specific business practices of the sender
[1] - the sender's application accesses the information in the data model and prints off the business document in hard copy
]
The receiver receives a business document:
[[1] - the document information components are scanned or manually entered into the receiver's application, running a risk of a possible scanning or entry error
[1] - the receiver's application stores the information components in the receiver's data model
[1] - the receiver's business practices act on the presence of expected information found in the data model
]
The sender's and receiver's business practices are probably very similar, though they do not have to be
[[1] - the data models could be quite different in structure, but probably have similar components
[1] - the applications could be very different, on different platforms and obtained from different vendors
]
The basis of UBL is the use of the Extensible Markup Language (XML)
[[1] - [http://www.w3.org/TR/xml]
[1] - web standard for the representation of hierarchically-structured text-based information
[1] - platform-, application- and vendor-independent standard based on the use of international Unicode characters
[1] - widespread and growing support in development tools and developer skills
]
Contrast the XML format with the commonly-known CSV format
[[1] - Comma separated values (CSV) is a commonly-used expression of information
[[2] - no declaration of the character set encoding of the characters in the file
[2] - information maintained in a set of flat comma-delimited text records
[2] - no concepts of data types for the declarative lexical validation of values
[2] - labeling of position-oriented fields optional based on presence of first line of labels
[2] - all labels are unique without the use of context to distinguish similar items
][1] - XML is a richly-featured specification of an expression of information
[[2] - provides for specification of a character encoding of Unicode characters
[2] - information is well organized in a strict hierarchy under a single "top" element (called the "document element") of an upside down tree structure
[2] - W3C Schema XSD 1.0 layers a type-based hierarchy of data types on top of XML text strings in order to govern lexical (character-level) validation of the information
[[3] - [http://www.w3.org/XML/Schema]
][2] - all information at every branch of the tree is unambiguously labeled
[[3] - hierarchical document context allows the same label to be used in different branches of the tree
][2] - validating tools can confirm the appropriate use of labels and the lexical structure of text beneath the labels according to the data types
][1] - programs and applications can identify the information in an arbitrary XML document with more precision and without the burden of the validation provided for by outboard validation tools
]
Just using XML is not a panacea
[[1] - using markup to label information in and of itself is platform independent
[1] - labeling the information in markup using a particular vocabulary (set of labels) enables applications to access the information so labeled
[1] - without an agreed-upon vocabulary, applications do not know under which labels particular information items can be identified
[1] - an arbitrary, vendor-defined vocabulary is as proprietary as a non-markup-based system for labeling information
]
Objective: enable interoperability between dissimilar systems using open standards
[[1] - using XML for all of the benefits of platform, vendor and application independence
[1] - using an agreed-upon vocabulary ensures that all users of the XML can identify the same information items using the agreed-upon labels
[1] - the XML document of a known vocabulary can then be understood by different applications on different platforms
[1] - free tools are available to work with the documents
[[2] - document creation, vocabulary validation, web and print formatting, etc.
]]
[Figure 1.2: System implementation independence
The same stacks of figures representing business practices above a data model above an application are shown, depicting that those of the sender are different from those of the receiver.
An arrow flows from the sender's application to a triangle depicting an XML document. An arrow flows from the document to the sender's hardware/software platform. A transmission is depicted from the sender's platform to a differing receiver's platform. An arrow flows from the platform to a triangle depicting the same XML document, which in turn is input to the receiver's application.
]
UBL does not attempt to redefine anyone's business practices
[[1] - UBL is only addressing the representation of business information in a standardized format for the purposes of interchange
[1] - businesses may wish to modify their expectations for information transfer in order to take advantage of UBL formats
]
UBL does not attempt to redefine anyone's back-end data models
[[1] - the interchange of information is distinct from anyone's internal storage representation
[1] - UBL only describes the document model of the actual interchange artefact
]
UBL is an extensible royalty-free library of standard electronic XML business documents
[[1] - e.g. documents for the transaction of business: purchase order, invoice, etc.
[1] - customization model provides for a community creating one's own profile of existing UBL document models
[1] - extension model provides for a community extending UBL document models with additional information items not standardized by UBL
[1] - a common library of objects enables a community to build additional document models not standardized by UBL
]
XML instances express all of the information of the business document
[[1] - all calculations represented in the numbers in the XML instance
[[2] - each community of users may have their own calculation models
[2] - recipient knows that all of the information found in the document already has all of the calculation models applied
][1] - no stylesheet or processing required by the receiving application to "complete" unspecified values
[[2] - a receiving application may choose to do completeness and consistency checking
]]
The UBL specification was developed under an open and accountable process
[[1] - governed by OASIS Technical Committee procedures
[[2] - [http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/process.php]
[2] - includes use of Roberts Rules of Order for committee process
][1] - all committee mail list archives and both intermediate and final work products are publicly available
[[2] - [http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ubl/]
]]
Vendors can compete on product differentiation around a standardized interchange
[[1] - standardization opens up a market for vendors to compete with their own innovations
[[2] - features of implementation
[2] - e.g. ease of use, documentation, etc.
][1] - it can be considered undesirable to be innovative with the document format
[[2] - e.g. no need to reinvent an invoice that already works sufficiently well even if it is not perfect
]]
Communities of users have the opportunity to define a common use of UBL
[[1] - includes profiles of choreography of documents to meet arbitrary business processes
[1] - includes modifications to the XML specifications of the UBL documents as appropriate to the needs of the community
]
[Figure 1.3: System implementation independence
The same stacks of figures representing business practices above a data model above an application are shown, depicting that those of the sender are different from those of the receiver.
An arrow flows from the sender's application to a triangle depicting an XML document. An arrow flows from the document to the sender's hardware/software platform. A transmission is depicted from the sender's platform to a differing receiver's platform. An arrow flows from the platform to a triangle depicting the same XML document, which in turn is input to the receiver's application.
Between the two sets of business practices is a box depicting a number of interchanges between the sender and receiver. This box is labeled "Profiles of Choreography".
]
Furthermore, individuals in the community can layer content constraints
[[1] - within any community of users, two trading partners can agree to utilize the community definition of UBL with an individual's requirements for code list values, identifier values and business rules
[1] - note this is not depicted in the diagram but discussed later on in the material
]
1.1.2 UBL history
[> 1.1.3][> 1.2][> 2.][< 1.1.1][^][^^][^^^]
Long history of development:
[[1] - distinguishes UBL from other standards by not starting from scratch with only a set of requirements
[1] - 1997 - Veo Systems builds Common Business Language (CBL) 1.0
[[2] - funding from NIST
[2] - first release in public domain (no licensing ownership)
][1] - 1998 - Commerce One acquired Veo and builds CBL 2.0
[[2] - for Commerce One electronic marketplaces
][1] - 2000 - Commerce One partners with SAP to build xCBL 3.0
[[2] - based on review of EDIFACT and X.12 to support EDI-type functionality
][1] - April 2001 - UBL started with contribution of xCBL 3.0
[1] - January 2003 - UBL 0.7 released for public review
[[2] - 7 document types for procurement
[2] - utilized by some early-adopters
][1] - September/November 2004 - UBL 1.0 released as Committee Specification and OASIS standard
[[2] - 8 document types for procurement
][1] - October 12, 2006 - UBL 2.0 finalized as a Committee Specification
[[2] - 31 document types for procurement and for transport
][1] - December 12, 2006 - UBL 2.0 standardized as an OASIS Standard
[[2] - [http://docs.oasis-open.org/ubl/os-UBL-2.0/]
[2] - zero technical differences from the committee specification of the materials
[[3] - the only difference is the wording on the cover page
][2] - any instances and implementations based on the committee specification need not change to support the final standard
][1] - May 26, 2008 - UBL 2.0 Update published as errata
[[2] - [http://docs.oasis-open.org/ubl/os-UBL-2.0-update/]
[2] - zero changes to document constraints
[2] - republished code lists to latest version of genericode
[2] - repaired definitions and meta data
]]
1.1.3 UBL FAQ
[> 1.1.4][> 1.2][> 2.][< 1.1.2][^][^^][^^^]
[http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/ubl/faq.php]
Highlights:
[[1] - "provide the world with standards for the electronic versions of traditional business documents"
[1] - "recognizes established commercial and legal practices"
[1] - "working toward the establishment of an international ecommerce infrastructure"
[1] - "some similarities between UBL and other XML business data initiatives, but taken together, UBL's attributes make it unique"
[1] - "UBL does not seek to compete with any existing XML business vocabularies but rather to meet a set of needs that are not being adequately met by any of them."
]
The committee attempts to keep the FAQ up to date with the latest information
1.1.4 Committee structure
[> 1.2][> 2.][< 1.1.3][^][^^][^^^]
UBL Technical Committee
[[1] - [http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/ubl/]
[1] - international membership (active members in Asia, Australia, Europe, North America)
[[2] - most members have a business perspective on the use of business documents
[2] - few members have a technical perspective on the technology of XML and markup
[2] - the combination worked well to keep the focus on the business need and ensuring the role of the technical members was to support the business members
][1] - company and individual memberships
[1] - the intellectual property of member contributions is transferred to OASIS through the membership agreement
[[2] - this restricts ad hoc contributions from outside the committee, thus assuring the provenance of the information that comprises the specifications
]]
UBL Subcommittees (alphabetical)
[[1] - OASIS UBL Adoption SC
[[2] - comprises the editorial board for [http://ubl.xml.org]
][1] - OASIS UBL Human Interface SC
[[2] - developing formatted output specifications
[2] - developing input form specifications
[2] - the subcommittee is not creating implementations, only detailed specifications sufficient for developers to implement
[[3] - thought to promote the broad development of a number of available implementations
]][1] - OASIS UBL Procurement SC
[[2] - developing, documenting and maintaining the conceptual models for the UBL document types related to the procurement process
][1] - OASIS UBL Small Business SC
[[2] - determining a formalized subset of UBL suitable for use by small businesses not needing the full functionality available in the entire UBL package
[2] - developing expressions suitable for machine-processing of the subset
][1] - OASIS UBL Transportation SC
[[2] - developing, documenting and maintaining the conceptual models for the UBL document types related to transportation
]]
Localization subcommittees develop UBL-related projects with translation objectives
[[1] - semantic descriptions
[1] - user interfaces
]
[[1] - OASIS UBL Chinese Localization Subcommittee
[1] - OASIS UBL Danish Localization Subcommittee
[1] - OASIS UBL German Localization Subcommittee
[1] - OASIS UBL Italian Localization Subcommittee
[1] - OASIS UBL Japanese Localization Subcommittee
[1] - OASIS UBL Korean Localization Subcommittee
[1] - OASIS UBL Spanish Localization Subcommittee
[1] - OASIS UBL Turkish Localization Subcommittee
]
Community driven collaboration for supporting new localizations
[[1] - for any language of interest, publicly-edited spreadsheets are created for a community to build with localized definitions of UBL constructs
[1] - [http://ubl.xml.org/forums/ubl-international-data-dictionary-idd-contributions]
[1] - at any point a localization committee can then be formed to take ownership of the definitions and submit them for inclusion in the UBL International Data Dictionary (IDD)
[1] - see [Localization spreadsheets - Section 6.1.2] for more details
]
1.2 ebXML context
[> 1.3][< 1.1.4][^^][^^^]
1.2.1 ebXML - Electronic business using XML
[> 1.3][> 2.][< 1.1.4][^^][^^^]
Modular suite of specifications of infrastructure that enables electronic commerce
[[1] - [http://www.ebxml.org]
[1] - suitable for implementation by enterprises of any size
[1] - suitable for use by enterprises in any geographical location
[1] - designed for use over the Internet
[[2] - "builds on the experience and strengths of existing EDI knowledge"
]]
Globally-developed and open XML-based standards
[[1] - provides for plug-and-play shrink-wrapped solutions
[1] - implementations of ebXML components are freely available
]
Collaborative global project
[[1] - OASIS
[[2] - Organization for the Advancement of Structured Information Standards
][1] - United Nations/ECE agency CEFACT
[[2] - ECE - Economic Commission for Europe
[2] - CEFACT - Centre for Trade Facilitation and Electronic Business
]]
ebXML standards that are also ISO/IEC standards
ebXML CPPA V 2.0 - ISO/IEC 15000-1
[[1] - ebXML Collaboration Protocol Profile and Agreement
[1] - definitions of the sets of information used in business collaboration
[1] - business partner definitions of capabilities
[1] - profile - data regarding technical abilities to engage in electronic business collaboration
[1] - agreement - data agreed to configure the public, shared aspects of protocols
[[2] - aligned with ebBPSS and ebMS
]]
ebXML MS V 2.0 - ISO/IEC 15000-2
[[1] - ebXML Message Service
[1] - develop and recommend technology for the transport, routing and packaging of business transactions using standard Internet technologies
[1] - communication-protocol neutral method for exchanging electronic business messages
[1] - enveloping constructs supporting reliable, secure delivery
[1] - contain payloads of any format type
[1] - XML framework that leverages common Internet standards
[1] - message consumption outside of the scope of ebMS
]
ebXML RIM V 2.0 - ISO/IEC 15000-3
[[1] - ebXML Registry Information Model
[1] - information model for the ebXML Registry for definition of content and meta data
[1] - stable store of information in a federated architecture
[1] - facilitate ebXML-based partnerships and transactions
[1] - e.g. schemata, documents, process descriptions, context descriptions, UBL models, parties, software components, etc.
[[2] - identified by URN identifiers
][1] - could be viewed simply as an online distributed data base store
]
ebXML RS V 2.0 - ISO/IEC 15000-4
[[1] - ebXML Registry Services
[1] - services specification for the ebXML Registry for access to content
[1] - interaction protocols, message definitions, message schemata, etc.
[1] - enable sharing of information between interested parties to enable business process integration
[1] - could be viewed simply as the methods and functions of online access to the repository
]
ebXML CCTS V2.01 (under aegis of UN/CEFACT TMG) - ISO/IEC 15000-5
[[1] - ebXML Core Components Technical Specification
[1] - syntax-neutral information about real-world business concepts
[[2] - basing two syntactic on the same semantic concept leads to interoperability
][1] - a methodology for defining messages
[[2] - defines what you should call and how you should structure your components in your documents
][1] - based on legacy EDI perspective of business concepts
[1] - basis for implementing interoperable XML business standards
[[2] - or EDIFACT, or X12, or whatever actual syntax
][1] - human-readable and machine-processed representations
[1] - work led by UN/CEFACT Techniques and Methodology Group (TMG)
]
Other ebXML specifications
ebXML BPSS
[[1] - technical business process specification
[1] - standard language with which business systems can be configured to support business collaboration between trading partners
[1] - for peer-to-peer interchange that crosses domains of control
]
Free implementations of some components of ebXML are already available
[[1] - [http://www.freebxml.org/] from Hong Kong
]
No actual message payloads being standardized in ebXML
[[1] - the "payload" is the meat of the message with the actual information being conveyed by the message infrastructure
[1] - decision in May 2000 to not include payload syntax from initial set of deliverables
[[2] - lead to the formation of the Universal Business Language Technical Committee
][1] - UBL documents are suitable as payloads for ebXML messages
]
Comparing the EDI and UBL standards stacks:
[Figure 1.4: Comparison of EDI and UBL infrastructures
The diagram depicts two stacks of boxes, with each pair of boxes with one of the boxes under the "EDI B2B" column and the other under the "Web B2B" column. The rows are labeled top-to-bottom as follows, with the indicated respective columns:
[[1] - message visualization
[[2] - EDI B2B: ad hoc
[2] - Web B2B: UBL formatting specifications
][1] - message contextualization
[[2] - EDI B2B: implementation guidelines
[2] - Web B2B: UBL customization
][1] - standard business message sets
[[2] - EDI B2B: EDIFACT/X12
[2] - Web B2B: UBL schemata
][1] - semantic description
[[2] - EDI B2B: CCTS
[2] - Web B2B: ebXML CCTS
][1] - business-quality messaging services
[[2] - EDI B2B: Value Added Networks
[2] - Web B2B: ebXML MS
][1] - business process descriptions
[[2] - EDI B2B: CASE tool
[2] - Web B2B: ebXML BPSS
][1] - trading partner agreements
[[2] - EDI B2B: ad hoc
[2] - Web B2B: ebXML CPP/A
]]
]
Opportunity for semantic interoperability using CCTS
[[1] - UN/CEFACT Core Component Technical Specification used to define a core component library of semantic constructs
[1] - the information items in the EDI messages will be based on the same core component library as the information items in the UBL schemata
[1] - active harmonization effort underway in UN/CEFACT TBG-17 Harmonization group to find and catalogue all UBL semantics in the core component library
]
1.3 UBL applicability
[> 1.4][< 1.2.1][^^][^^^]
1.3.1 The role of UBL in e-commerce
[> 1.3.2][> 1.4][> 2.][< 1.2.1][^^][^^^]
UBL does not try to address every electronic business interchange problem
[[1] - business needs are as unique as the entities doing business
[1] - a wide range of candidate uses of UBL documents is described in the specification
]
UBL does not try to define or constrain any business process
[[1] - business processes are ad hoc or developed using process modeling methodologies
[1] - UBL document models can plug into a business process to satisfy interchange requirements
[1] - an opportunity to move quickly to a production working interchange environment from an abstract business process definition
[[2] - map information model to the UBL business objects and document types
]]
UBL is only defining the vocabulary and structure of electronic business documents for interchange
[[1] - normative deliverables:
[[2] - spreadsheet specification of the vocabulary
[[3] - ISO/IEC 11179 dictionary entry names
[3] - UBL element names
[3] - cardinalities (how many of the elements may or must be present)
[3] - English language definitions
][2] - W3C Schema (XSD) expressions of the document constraints
[[3] - defines a set of XML interchange document models and vocabulary
[3] - constrains the nesting of information in XML constructs
[3] - also includes constrains not expressible in W3C Schema
]][1] - UBL does not force any constraints on back-end processing, data models, database schemata, calculation models, etc.
[1] - customization approaches available to address tailored interchange requirements
[[2] - restricting and extending UBL document models
]]
UBL employs a framework for communities of users and for trading partners to declare conformance to a particular suite of controlled vocabularies (e.g. code lists, identifiers)
[[1] - uses a supplemental methodology and approach to layer code list and value validation on top of XSD schema validation
[1] - a community of users of UBL specifies which controlled vocabularies are in use
[[2] - orthogonal to UBL specification
]]
UBL attempts to address 80%-90% of requirements for information interchange
[[1] - basic requirements based on business experience of committee members
[1] - UBL 2 addresses 80%-90% of more documents than UBL 1
[[2] - UBL 2 does not attempt to flesh out the remaining 10-20% of business information not implemented in UBL 1
]]
Customization
[[1] - provides for specifying how UBL is the basis for building only that which is needed by communities of users or by two trading partners
[1] - different profiles of business practices may impose the use or non-use of available UBL constructs
[1] - can specify custom document models based on UBL information models
[[2] - referred to in committee as "compatible customization"
[2] - focus is on the information model
][1] - can specify custom subsets of UBL document models
[[2] - referred to in committee as "conformant customization"
[2] - focus is on the XML syntax
]]
Extensibility
[[1] - provides for addressing those parts of the missing components needed by communities of users or by two trading partners
[1] - custom extensions are allowed to be added to standardized UBL document models
[[2] - developed using compatible customization methods
][1] - communities can build their own documents utilizing the UBL library of business objects
]
UBL scenarios and business processes are only documentary
[[1] - used to support the decisions made by committee members when choosing document structures
[1] - there is no obligation to match the business document flows or workflows described by UBL
[1] - a plausible scenario was required by the committee with which to frame the directions undertaken and the decisions made
]
Users need only use those documents of UBL that they require
[[1] - no obligation to implement all UBL document types
]
Users need only use those optional portions of UBL documents that they require
[[1] - no obligation to implement all UBL information items
]
Communities of users can define a "UBL Customization" for their collective use
[[1] - profiles of different scenarios for exchanging business documents
[1] - specifications of document types in each profile
[[2] - a single UBL document may have different specifications of use in two profiles
][1] - choice of standardized information items in each document type
[1] - specifications of extension information items in each document type
[1] - documentation of calculation models to populate the information items
]
UBL provides a key economic benefit to the end user through standardization
[[1] - realized through availability of off-the-shelf inexpensive business software to handle the functions of dealing with the information transmissions
[1] - the risk of investment by developers is mitigated by having a wider community of users adopting the technology
]
Possible stimulus for a major economic shift in the area of electronic commerce software
[[1] - the same shift as has happened in the past in other areas of information processing
[[2] - initial "cottage industry" of vendors creating expensive custom systems for specific applications by users who can afford to pay
[2] - through standardization it becomes possible to address most (though not all) requirements
[[3] - sufficient functionality that people will adopt the solution because the implementation is inexpensive to use and experiment with
][2] - sufficient customer pull creates a demand for a wide variety of software vendors to meet the need of a growing number of users of the low-cost or free technology
[[3] - vendors can still compete on aspects of differentiation (usability, performance, features, integration, etc.)
]][1] - operating systems (1960's)
[[2] - migration from bespoke systems to portable machine-independent systems
][1] - programming languages (1970's)
[[2] - migration from specific-purpose languages to general-purpose languages
][1] - publishing systems (1980's)
[[2] - migration from typesetting and typography to desktop publishing and generalized markup
][1] - hypertext systems (1990's)
[[2] - migration from custom applications (e.g. Ted Nelson's Xanadu, Bill Atkinson's Hypercard, etc.) to all-purpose web browsers (Tim Berners-Lee's HTML)
]]
Standardization creates a marketplace for inexpensive products and support services
[[1] - potential big savings for small companies
[1] - software, training, books can all be developed for a larger customer base than with a proprietary technology
]
1.3.2 Where is UBL going?
[> 1.3.3][> 1.4][> 2.][< 1.3.1][^][^^][^^^]
UBL 2.x development within OASIS
[[1] - base delivery 2.0 plus extension releases for "dot versions" (e.g. 2.1, 2.2, etc.) if the committee decides they are important enough to issue
[1] - new document types
[[2] - support a wider range of messages and scenarios
][1] - new common library components
[[2] - support a wider collection of information objects to use in messages
][1] - new code lists
[[2] - support a wider set of code lists and newer versions of code lists
][1] - UBL 2.1 planned for 2009/2010 time frame
[[2] - the technical committee is currently accepting use cases and contributions
[2] - UBL 2.1 will include new business objects and new document types
]]
UBL next generation development will be within UN/CEFACT
[[1] - agreed in March 2006 - UN/CEFACT and UBL collaboration
[[2] - "UN/CEFACT recognizes UBL 2 as appropriate first-generation XML documents for eBusiness"
[2] - future UN/CEFACT deliverables constitute the upgrade path for UBL
[2] - in the expectation that UN/CEFACT will produce its own integrated set of XML schemas within a period of three years, OASIS will produce no further major versions of UBL past UBL 2
[2] - OASIS will grant UN/CEFACT a perpetual, irrevocable license to create derivative works based on UBL, provided significant work progresses within the three-years
]]
Adopting UBL is not contravening UN/CEFACT strategic direction
[[1] - UBL is recognized by the memorandum of understanding on eBusiness standards
[[2] - memorandum between International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC), International Organization for Standardization (ISO), International Telecommunication Union (ITU) and United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UN/ECE, UN/CEFACT)
][1] - "UBL is the useable stepping stone to a unified UN/CEFACT standard"
[[2] - from Draft Business plan for a CEN/ISSS Workshop on "Interoperability in the Implementation of electronic public procurement in Europe" (CEN/ISSS WS/ePPE - renamed "Business Interoperability Initiative")
]]
UBL business objects are being aligned with UN/CEFACT semantics
[[1] - working with TBG-17 harmonization group to catalogue every UBL 2.1-defined semantic in the UN/CEFACT core component library
]
1.3.3 The Danish UBL experience
[> 1.3.4][> 1.4][> 2.][< 1.3.2][^][^^][^^^]
Formal analysis by KPMG on behalf of the Danish Ministry of Finance October 2003
[[1] - [http://www.idealliance.org/proceedings/xtech05/papers/03-05-02/]
[1] - estimated 18 million invoices sent to public authorities each year
[1] - conservative estimate of eliminating 10 minutes of handling for each invoice would save €94m
[1] - conservative estimate of eliminating 17 minutes of handling and matching for each combination of order and invoice would save €160m
]
Legislated use of derivative of UBL 0.7 Invoice - OIOXML
[[1] - [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OIOXML]
[1] - 1.2 million invoices per month since February 2005
[1] - data entry houses created for those without UBL support
[[2] - free to companies with a turnover less than €2m
[2] - cost of €1 each invoice to other companies and public institutions
[[3] - implemented by paying for a stamp
[3] - stamp affixed to the invoice as evidence of payment
]][1] - hundreds of millions of dollars/euros in savings realized just for the implementation of a single document type
]
Online Schematron validation
[[1] - an online service is made available to check the validity of candidate UBL submission before sending the document to the government
[[2] - useful as a diagnostic tool for developers
[2] - useful as a confirmation tool for invoice submitters
][1] - proposed initial implementation of the Danish UBL 2.0 Customization will only have Schematron validation and not any customized schema validation
]
Anticipated legislated use of UBL 2 may include up to 15 document types - OIOUBL
[[1] - [http://www.oioubl.info]
[1] - "Offentlig Information Online" ("Public Information Online")
[1] - catalogues
[1] - ordering
[1] - statements
]
OIOSI project defining and implementing interchange protocols
[[1] - [http://www.softwareborsen.dk/projekter/softwarecenter/serviceorienteret-infrastruktur]
[1] - OIO Service-oriented Infrastructure
[1] - open-source availability of service-oriented architecture components
[1] - defined use of an OIOSI toolkit and UUID registry
]
1.3.4 Government procurement
[> 1.3.5][> 1.4][> 2.][< 1.3.3][^][^^][^^^]
European e-Government: Ministers make a unanimous declaration on 2010 targets
[[1] - agreement reached in 2005
[1] - [http://www.publictechnology.net/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=4060]
[1] - By 2010 all public administrations across Europe will have the capability of carrying out 100% of their procurement electronically, where legally permissible, thus creating a fairer and more transparent market for all companies independent of a company's size or location within the single market.
[1] - By 2010 at least 50% of public procurement above the EU public procurement threshold will be carried out electronically.
]
NES - North European Subset
[[1] - [http://www.nesubl.eu]
[1] - targeted for public procurement for northern European governments
[1] - led by the Danes and built on the Danish experience
]
BII - Business Interoperability Interfaces
[[1] - [http://www.en.ds.dk/bii]
[1] - targeted for public procurement for all European governments
[1] - led by the Danes and combines requirements from CODICE Spain (for pre-award documents) and NES (for post-award documents)
[1] - objective only to specify requirements
]
PEPPOL pilot - Pan-European Public eProcurement On-Line
[[1] - [http://www.peppol.eu]
[1] - led by the Danes to deploy the BII requirements as a pilot project
[1] - development of document models and open-source document transportation facilities
[1] - available to European members to adopt and deploy in production
[1] - The vision of the PEPPOL project is that any company and in particular SMEs in the EU can communicate electronically with any European governmental institution for the entire procurement process. The project will set up integrated pilot solutions across borders
]
1.3.5 Other projects seen on the UBL radar
[> 1.3.6][> 1.4][> 2.][< 1.3.4][^][^^][^^^]
So many UBL projects are underway that the committee is unaware of or only just heard of without knowing details of unpublished projects
[[1] - please let us know at [info@CraneSoftwrights.com [mailto:info@CraneSoftwrights.com]] of any others you are aware of in order for us to update these materials.
[1] - Hong Kong
[[2] - DTTN
[2] - [http://www.unece.org/cefact/single_window/sw_cases/hongkong.htm]
][1] - Italy
[[2] - UBL 1.0 and SBS for SME-driven business scenarios
[2] - [http://services.txt.it/abilities/project.html]
[2] - project member work in Lithuania, Slovakia, Turkey, Romania and Hungary
][1] - Korea
[[2] - Korean Customs Service
][1] - Panama
[[2] - La Cámara de Comercio de Panama
][1] - Singapore
[[2] - New TradeNet
][1] - South America
[[2] - various projects underway based on Spanish projects
][1] - Spain
[[2] - UBL Invoice government wide for Balearic Islands
[2] - Ministry of the Economy project
[2] - Spanish Tax Agency and the banking system
][1] - Sweden
[[2] - October 2005 - "Swed-Invoice" recommended for all government use by the Swedish Financial Management Authority
[[3] - anticipated savings of SEK 4b (US$500m) in the first five years
]][1] - United Kingdom
[[2] - February 2006 - Zanzibar marketplace, created by the UK Office of Government Buying Solutions
]]
[[1] - United States (Department of Transport)
[[2] - Electronic Freight Management (EFM) project undergoing tests with UBL Despatch Advice, Receipt Advice, Bill of Lading and Transportation Status
[[3] - example pilot projects with Limited Brands (China) shipping Victoria Secret clothing to Columbus, Ohio involving 14 participating companies
[[4] - each participant has their own business practices, data models for those business practices and applications for those data models
][3] - not a central database, but a distributed Service-Oriented Architecture (SOA) where responses to messages are standard UBL instances
[3] - requesting a status report triggers a federated query to all participants in the shipping process, each returning a UBL Transportation Status message
[3] - the query aggregates the result into a single HTML page
[3] - a non-responding participant does not forestall the report
[3] - [http://www.tfhrc.gov/pubrds/06may/06.htm]
[3] - [http://www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/freight/intermodal/efmi/]
[3] - [http://www.metrans.org/nuf/2007/documents/Onder.pdf]
]]]
[Figure 1.5: US Department of Transport project outline
Five similar data flows are depicted, one for each of the supplier, a transport company, a customs organization, a warehousing firm and the buyer.
Each data flow shows independent business practices, data models and applications for each participant. Each application is shown forwarding a message to an aggregator in response to a message request. The aggregator's hardware and software produces the HTML status report.
]
1.3.6 Document standardization business areas for UBL
[> 1.4][> 2.][< 1.3.5][^][^^][^^^]
Groups of UBL documents are being defined for two major areas of electronic business
Sourcing-to-payment procurement cycle (post-award) - in UBL 2.0
[[1] - cataloguing, ordering, invoicing, payment
]
Transportation - in UBL 2.0
[[1] - fulfillment, shipping
]
Tendering (pre-award) - coming in UBL 2.1
[[1] - notices, tenders, invitations, notifications
]
Sales order and reporting - coming in UBL 2.1
[[1] - requirements from ENEA in Italy
]
Collaborative planning, forecasting and replenishment documents - coming in UBL 2.1
[[1] - requirements from iSURF in Turkey
]
Some overlapping roles between scenarios
[[1] - the actual roles of parties in UBL transactions are dependent on the context of use
[1] - e.g. the despatch party and delivery party as applied to the procurement process may differ in the transportation process
[[2] - i.e. whether the consignor in the transportation process is actually equal to the despatch party or seller party in the procurement exchange depends on different business cases
]]
1.4 UBL 2.0 specification contents
[> 2.][< 1.3.6][^^][^^^]
1.4.1 UBL 2.0 specification contents
[> 1.4.2][> 2.][< 1.3.6][^^][^^^]
[http://docs.oasis-open.org/ubl/os-UBL-2.0-update/]
[[1] - public home of UBL specification and files
[1] - replaces old installation of UBL 2.0 initial release:
[[2] - [http://docs.oasis-open.org/ubl/os-UBL-2.0/]
]]
The UBL 2.0 updated specification two parts unpack to 190Mb of content:
[[1] - [http://docs.oasis-open.org/ubl/os-UBL-2.0.zip]
[[2] - OASIS standard - December 12, 2006
][1] - [http://docs.oasis-open.org/ubl/os-UBL-2.0-update-delta.zip]
[[2] - Errata "delta" package - May 26, 2008
[2] - these files are copied on top of the UBL 2.0 files, replacing the ones that now have new content
[2] - be careful if you are overlaying these files on a modified UBL installation as some modifications may be lost
][1] - art/ - referenced artwork in the documentation files ([UBL 2.0 specification contents - Section 1.4.1 UBL 2.0 specification contents])
[1] - asn/ - ASN.1 expressions of the document models ([ASN.1 documents and document models - Section 5.1.1 ASN.1 documents and document models])
[1] - cl/ - code list expressions in genericode
[1] - css/ - CSS stylesheets for HTML rendering of the documentation files ([UBL 2.0 specification contents - Section 1.4.1 UBL 2.0 specification contents])
[1] - db/ - DocBook support files ([UBL 2.0 specification contents - Section 1.4.1 UBL 2.0 specification contents])
[1] - doc/ - NDR documentation file ([NDR checklist - Section 4.1.3 NDR checklist])
[1] - etc/ - re-use cross reference file ([ABIE re-use report - Section 3.2.1 ABIE re-use report])
[1] - mod/ - document model spreadsheets ([Library of shared and specific information items - Section 3.2.2 Library of shared and specific information items])
[1] - uml/ - UML expressions of the document models ([UBL UML information models - Section 3.2.4 UBL UML information models])
[1] - val/ - out-of-the-box two-step validation demonstration ([UBL document validation - Section 5.2.8 UBL document validation])
[1] - xml/ - sample instances ([Sample UBL instances - Section 5.2.3 Sample UBL instances])
[1] - xsd/ - document model schemata with documentation ([W3C Schema model fragments - Section 5.2.7 W3C Schema model fragments])
[[2] - the files in this directory are the only normative files for UBL 2.0
][1] - xsdrt/ - document model schemata without documentation ([W3C Schema model fragments - Section 5.2.7 W3C Schema model fragments])
]
The normative documentation is in XML with an HTML projection for reading in a browser
[[1] - UBL-2.0.xml - UBL specification hypertext document in XML
[[2] - the hypertext document links to the components of the specification
[2] - art\ includes all artwork
[2] - UBL-2.0.html - documentation rendering in HTML format ([Participants and document flows - Section 2.0 Participants and document flows])
[[3] - this is where people can browse the content of the hypertext document
[3] - db\ used for transformation from DocBook XML source to HTML target
[3] - css\ used for rendering HTML
][2] - UBL-index-2.0.pdf - documentation rendering in PDF format
[[3] - this is a committee process artefact that serves no useful purpose
[3] - included only to satisfy archaic process requirements that are under OASIS review in consideration of removing its mandated presence
]][1] - note that the directories listed above without page number citations are related to the documentation files in support of the UBL-2.0.xml hypertext XML document and its HTML and PDF renderings
[1] - UBL-2.0-update.html - errata-only documentation
[[2] - the main UBL documentation in the hypertext document did not change with the update
[2] - this errata document only indicates which files have changed
]]
[http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/ubl]
[[1] - public home of UBL committee working pages
[1] - committee membership
[1] - committee documents and files
[1] - committee email archive
[1] - public comments submission and archive
[[2] - "Send A Comment" button
[2] - do not use this list for general comments or questions, only for comments to be formally reviewed by the technical committee
]]
[http://docs.oasis-open.org/ubl/]
[[1] - public home of UBL committee repository files
[1] - milestone deliverables
[1] - committee documents and files too large for the committee working pages
]
1.4.2 UBL.xml.org and UBL-Dev
[> 2.][< 1.4.1][^][^^][^^^]
[http://ubl.xml.org]
[[1] - community support site replacing the former Support Subcommittee site
[[2] - [http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/28723/support.htm]
][1] - resources created by the UBL committee and by the UBL community
[[2] - committee documents
[2] - contributions from academic research projects
[2] - vendors and users
[2] - model trading partner agreement templates
][1] - publicly-available customizations
[1] - news
[1] - events
[1] - products
[1] - services
[1] - forums
[1] - blogs
]
[http://www.oasis-open.org/archives/ubl-dev/]
[[1] - un-moderated publicly-subscribed developer list
[1] - [http://www.oasis-open.org/mlmanage/]
]

This is an accessible version of Crane's commercial training material. The content has been specifically designed to assist screen reader software in viewing the entire textual content. Figures are replaced with text narratives. Navigation hints are in square brackets: [Tx.x] and [Fx.x] are textual representations of the applicability icons; [digit] indicates list depth for nested lists; [link [URL]] indicates the URL of a hyperlink if different than link; [EXAMPLE] indicates an example listing of code; [FIGURE] indicates the presence of a figure replaced by its description; [>] jumps forward; [<] jumps backward; [^] jumps to start of the section; [^^] jumps to the start of the chapter; [^^^] jumps to the table of contents. Suggestions for improvement are welcome: [info@CraneSoftwrights.com] Book sales: [http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/links/trn-acc.htm] Information: [http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/links/info-acc.htm] This content is protected by copyright and, as there are no means to protect this accessible version from plagiarism, please do not make any commercial edition available to others.

+//ISBN 1-894049::CSL::Presentation::UBL//DOCUMENT Practical Universal Business Language Deployment 2009-02-12 13:50UTC//EN Practical Universal Business Language Deployment Third Edition - 2009-02-12 ISBN 978-1-894049-23-8 Copyright © Crane Softwrights Ltd.