Seventeenth Meeting of the

1
Seventeenth Meeting of the ISO-IEC-ITU-UN/ECE
MoU/MG 17th October 2006 Item 7.4 UN/CEFACT and
UBL Coordination

• Where we came from
• Where we are today
• Where do we want to go?

Tim McGrath, Vice-Chair OASIS UBL Technical
Committee
2
UBL 2.0

• Now an OASIS Committee Specification.
• OASIS Standard expected December 2006
• Extended library.
• 31 document types.
• Extended Procurement Process (Europe).
• Transportation Process Documents (Asia and US).
• Based on real implementation experience.
• Improved library of re-usable components
• Alignment with UN/CEFACT projects.
• Core Component Type library.
• Input from Trade and Business Groups.
• Compliant to ISO 15000-5
• ebXML Core Component Technical Specification.

3
UBLs Ancestry
CBL
XML
EDI
4
UN/CEFACT Collaboration

• Agreed in April 2006.
• UN/CEFACT recognizes UBL 2 as appropriate
  first-generation XML documents for eBusiness.
• Future UN/CEFACT deliverables constitute the
  upgrade path for UBL.
• Maintenance of UBL 2 remains with OASIS
• 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.
• OASIS will grant UN/CEFACT a perpetual,
  irrevocable license to create derivative works
  based on UBL.
• This means
• If you want a solution today then use UBL 2.0.
• UBL 2.0 is the precursor to the next generation
  of UN/CEFACT XML standards.

5
UN/CEFACT Collaboration Activities part 1

• TBG1 - Supply Chain
• completed first analysis
• TBG3 Transport
• reviewed UBL 2.0 specification
• TBG17 Harmonization
• discussions started
• TMG/CCTS Core Component Technical Specification
• discussions started
• ATG/NDR - XML Naming and Design Rules
• working team formed

6
UN/CEFACT Collaboration Activities Part 2

• CEFACT BUREAU/ UBL TC
• Mark Palmer and Tim McGrath
• TBG2 UN/eDocs
• unclear how to proceed
• ICG (and ATG2)
• need to engage formally
• TBG19 e-Government
• still immature
• TMG/Context Methodology/Message Assembly
• still immature

7
UN/CEFACT Convergence Status

• Progress with TBG1 has exposed confusion
  surrounding the UN/CEFACT methodology.
• Need guidance regarding
• the agreed method of message assembly
• Re-usable library or pick and mix
• the use of core components
• E.g. when a transaction moves from the Tendering
  phase to the Purchasing phase to the Shipment
  phase etc.
• the role of UN/eDocs
• Vis-à-vis Harmonized Core Component Library
• UN/CEFACT recommendation required
• Pragmatism versus theory (?)