Transcript Proposal for a Revised Technical Framework for UN/CEFACT eProcurement impact summary • (proposed) Revised Technical Framework: • Standardize on semantics not syntax or formats • UN/CEFACT ‘core’

Proposal for a
Revised
Technical Framework
for UN/CEFACT
eProcurement impact
1
summary
• (proposed) Revised Technical Framework:
• Standardize on semantics not syntax or formats
• UN/CEFACT ‘core’ semantics establish foundation for interoperability
• Communities of use create their own implementations
• Process, components, structures, documents and syntax
• Statement of conformance
• Registry of conformant specifications published by UN/CEFACT
• UN/CEFACT is a facilitator of interoperability between communities
• eProcurement impact:
• UN/CEFACT projects will develop…
• Profiles for eProcurement processes
• Business requirements, rules and semantics
• Published as Deliverables for Information
• Recommendation for use of standards
• European eInvoicing community (e.g. CEN/BII) develops …
• European core Invoice Data Model
• European business requirements, rules and semantics
2
UN/CEFACT
REVISED TECHNICAL FRAMEWORK
PROPOSAL
3
creating a ‘core’ semantic reference
‘core’
for eBusiness ‘community of use’
business processes
Used in
components
and code lists
Used in
structures
Used in
syntax expressions
Used in
4
Defining the ‘core’
1. Union of all usages
(A,B,C,D,E,F,G)
community
A
community
G
E
F
B
C
D
community
Everything everyone wants:
X complex to understand
X complex to maintain
(harmonize)
 enables compliance of
legacy/current solutions
X compliance does not ensure
interoperability
2. Designed set
(A,C,F,Z)
What we think everyone needs:
X creates yet another standard
X challenges compliance of
legacy/current solutions
 compliance ensures interoperability
commuity
A
F
C
Z
Defining the ‘core’
3. Intersection of all usages
(F)
4. Intersection of common usage
(B,C,F,G)
G
B
C
F
What many use:
 still simple to understand
• harder to maintain (harmonize)
 enables compliance to subsets by
legacy/current solutions
X compliance does not ensure
interoperability
can evolve towards
F
What everyone uses:
 simple to understand
 easier to maintain
 encourages compliance of
legacy/current solutions
• compliance ensures
(limited) interoperability
communities of use…
• Trading environments around specific:
–
–
–
–
–
–
business domains,
industry groups,
regions,
governments,
technologies or
commercial service models
• Communities contain smaller communities
• No organization exists in only one community
– members overlap
– communities form webs not hierarchies
• They are identified by context
– requirements defined by business rules
• May support disparate implementations by members
7
communities specify their own
implementation guides
• Business processes
– Establish context of use
• Document requirements
– Invoice, Freight Invoice, Utility Invoice, Bill, etc, etc.
– Process determines function NOT name of document
• Business rules (incl. code lists)
– “In cases when invoices are issued in other currencies than the national
currency of the seller, the seller may be required to provide information
about the VAT total amount in his national currency.”
• Syntax
– EDIFACT, X12, ASN.1, XML
• Formats
– XML vocabularies (UBL, GS1, OAGi, XBRL, ISO20022)
8
a revised technical framework for UN/CEFACT
Requirements for
Trade Facilitation
Core Interoperable
Foundation Library
Trade Agreements
International Laws
Published in
WTO/UN recommendations
Trade Facilitation
Recommendations
‘core’ business processes
Based on
standard
repository
schema
‘core’ components
‘core’ structures
syntax expressions of models
messaging protocols
EDIFACT
XML
9
communities may have
different implementations
UN/CEFACT
Governance Communities
Conformance
to core semantics
Core Interoperable
Foundation Library
Implementations
Conformance
to community semantics
Agriculture Domain
Cross Border
Agriculture domain
10
using common semantics
UN/CEFACT semantic
foundation
‘identifier’
‘date’
‘currency’
‘rate’
‘party’
‘location’
‘item’
‘document’
‘period’
‘address’
Used by Communities
‘UBL common library’
‘CCL based on CCTS 2.01’
‘BII invoice transaction model’
‘ISO 20022 Financial Invoice’
11
assurances of conformity
• Communities issue statements of self conformance
– no certification
• It is assumed that the industry will police itself and that
most communities will determine that it is in their own
best interests to make truthful and accurate claims.
• Sample:
– “This specification is in conformity to the UN/CEFACT
Core Interoperable Foundation Library in that it uses
the following generic components…
– All new components introduced in this specification are
defined in reference to these generic components and
are consistent with them.”





12
registry of
community specifications
European Commission Joinup Registry
IMS Global Learning Consortium
IVI Consortium
Community
Specifications
13
ISO 20022 Registry
14
European eInvoicing example
WHAT IT COULD LOOK LIKE
15
european eInvoicing example
UN/CEFACT
Core Interoperable
Foundation Library
eInvoice Governance
Communities
UN/CEFACT
Procurement
domain
ISO 20022
Universal financial industry
message scheme
Implementations
BII
Message definition
16
using a ‘core’ semantic reference
for eInvoicing a European Profile
‘core’
‘Supplier
initiated
Invoice’
‘identifier’
‘date’
‘currency’
‘rate’
‘party’
‘location’
‘item’
‘document’
‘period’
‘address’
‘address
type’
‘address
details’
business process models
Used in
data models
and code lists
Used in
data structures
Used in
‘billing
process’
‘common
procurement
library’
‘invoice
transaction
requirements’
syntax expression
Used in
‘invoice
syntax
mapping’
17
maintained by
‘core’ models
UN/CEFACT
Procurement
domain
‘supplier
initiated
Invoice’
UN/CEFACT
Bureau
Programme
Support
‘identifier’
‘date’
‘currency’
‘rate’
UN/CEFACT
Bureau
Programme
Support
UN/CEFACT
Bureau
Programme
Support
‘party’
‘location’
‘item’
‘document’
‘period’
‘address’
business process models
Used in
data models
and code lists
Used in
data structures
Used in
XML format
‘address
type’
Used in
‘address
details’
EDIFACT format
Used in
18
The role of CEN/BII specifications
• BII is defining core information
requirement models
– the set of information elements
sufficient to cater for the
generally expressed business
requirements applicable
throughout the European
market.
• BII offers an approach to eInvoicing interoperability
within Europe.
BII
19
the CEN/BII European Profile
business process models
Used in
data models
and code lists
Used in
‘billing
process’
‘common
procurement
library’
maintained by
CEN/BII
UN/CEFACT
and
OASIS UBL
data structures
Used in
‘invoice
transaction
requirements’
CEN/BII
XML format
Used in
‘invoice
format
mapping’
CEN/BII
20
European eInvoicing example
HOW IT COULD WORK
21
using ‘core’ semantics
Can we
speak in
English ?
22
European Invoice Semantics
UN/CEFACT
Core Interoperable
Foundation Library
European Common Invoice
requirements
23
European eInvoice exchange
UN/CEFACT
Core Interoperable
Foundation Library
European Common Invoice
requirements
24
UN/CEFACT Revised Technical Framework
POTENTIAL IMPACT ON
E-PROCUREMENT
PROGRAMME OF WORK
25
potential impact on
eProcurement PoW
• UN/CEFACT projects will develop Profiles
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
‘Deliverables for Information’ rather then ‘Standards’
‘core’ industry rather than ‘cross’ industry
Generic semantics rather than documents, syntax or formats
Similar, but not same as BRS and RSM
Processes, rules and requirements
Formalized business rules
Semantic reference models
• Other activities…
– Develop guidelines
• Assist in implementation support
– Develop UNECE Recommendations
• Such as Recommendations to use certain specifications or standards
• As with EDIFACT, Layout Key, Codes, etc..
– Attract more business expertise
• UN/CEFACT eProcurement domain  ‘global version of CEN/BII’ 
26
what happens to current libraries?
UN/CEFACT
Core Interoperable
Foundation Library
Governance Communities
(stakeholders of libraries)
Core Components
Library 2.01
Community
Core Components
Library 3.0
Community
UN/EDIFACT
Community
UNTDED-ISO7372
Community
Note: libraries are developed and approved by communities of use
Implementations
A
B
C
D
27
what happens to current BRSs?
UN/CEFACT
Core Interoperable
Foundation Library
UN/CEFACT Projects (approved by Bureau)
Sectoral PDA
Agriculture Domain
Agriculture Domain
• eCert
• Crop Data Sheet
• E-Lab
Supply Chain PDA
Procurement Domain
• BRSs developed as
Profiles and approved by
projects
• Registered with self
conformance in a
UN/CEFACT repository
• Published as UN/CEFACT
Deliverables for
Information
• CI-*
• CEFM
• eTendering
28
what happens to current RSMs?
UN/CEFACT
Governance Communities
Implementations
(stakeholders of current deliverables)
community
Core Interoperable
Foundation Library
Agriculture Industry Group
Agriculture Domain
• eCert (RSM)
• Crop Data Sheet (RSM)
Core
Components
Library 2.01
Procurement Industry
Group
• CII (RSM)
Core
Components
Library 3.0
A
community
X
• CEFM (RSM)
• eTendering (RSM)
• Specific technical specifications (such as RSM and Schemas) are developed and
approved by governance communities
• May be registered in a UN/CEFACT repository under a self conformance
statement as publications based on UN/CEFACT foundation library
29
potential impact on
Cross Industry Invoice
• Publications of CII will become community specifications
– Documents, syntax and formats are created by communities of
use
• UN/CEFACT Library is ‘core’ rather than ‘cross industry’
• Community requirements drive demand
– Should be based on CIFL
– Would be published in UN/CEFACT registry
• Core Component Libraries (based on either CCTS 3.0 and
2.01) will also become community specifications
– They are libraries used by specific communities to support legacy
implementations
– Should be based on CIFL
– Would be published in UN/CEFACT registry
• Each governance community approves its own specifications
– Can claim self conformance to UN/CEFACT foundational library
– Similar to industry groups within ISO 20022 project or CEN CWAs
30
summary
• (proposed) Revised Technical Framework:
• Standardize on semantics not syntax or formats
• UN/CEFACT ‘core’ semantics establish foundation for interoperability
• Communities of use create their own implementations
• Process, components, structures, documents and syntax
• Statement of conformance
• Registry of conformant specifications published by UN/CEFACT
• UN/CEFACT is a facilitator of interoperability between communities
• eProcurement impact:
• UN/CEFACT projects will develop…
• Profiles for eProcurement processes
• Business requirements, rules and semantics
• Published as Deliverables for Information
• Recommendation for use of standards
• European eInvoicing community (e.g. CEN/BII) develops …
• European core Invoice Data Model
• European business requirements, rules and semantics
31