XBRL Tools – An Overview of the Current Status Copenhagen, Denmark – November 2007 Hugh Wallis Director of Technical Standards XBRL International Inc.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Status on the Mapping of Metadata Standards
Advertisements

XBRL International Working groups - update Versioning Roland Hommes
XBRL International Standards Update Ignacio Hernandez-Ros Technology Development, XBRL International Inc.
XBRL Standards – Status Report München, Germany – CEBS Workshop Hugh Wallis Director of Standards Development XBRL International Inc.
XBRL International Supporting the COREP Project Ignacio Hernandez-Ros Technology Development, XBRL International Inc.
Presented By : Sreedhar V. An end to end integrated solution with an ERP platform of Microsoft Dynamics NAVISION o A single platform that provides overall.
Abstract Model PWD th Eurofiling Workshop 12 December 2012 Herm Fischer Abstract Model Task Force.
Steps for Filing Your First 10Q/10K Michael Ohata Director Reporting Standards - Microsoft Walter Hamscher President & CEO - Standard Advantage.
Getting a XBRL Project Up and Running. Mr John Morgan UBmatrix Australia th XBRL International Conference “Getting.
Developing an XBRL Reporting Architecture Rafael Valero Arce Fujitsu España Services es.fujitsu.com.
ECM RFP 101 Presented by: Carol Mitchell C.M. Mitchell Consulting.
How XBRL Will Enhance the Credibility of Financial Statements Presented by Graham Ward President, IFAC.
XBRL in the UK Peter Calvert XBRL European Technical Meeting 5 October 2006.
Introduction to SAP R/3.
Effort in hours Duration Over Weeks Or Months Inception Launch Web Lifecycle Methodology Maintenance Phases Copyright Wonderlane Studios.
INFORMATION SYSTEMS DPM ARCHITECT: STATUS AND NEXT STEPS Presented by Bartosz Ochocki Authored by Víctor Morilla Rome, May 2014.
McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2013 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved. Chapter 9 XBRL.
API WG Update 16th Eurofiling Workshop Wednesday 12 December Herm Fischer.
Implementing XBRL in Your Software. Agenda 8:30 - 9:00 Introduction Arthur Stewart E&Y 9:00 - 9:30 Real Stories: Oracle Corporation Rob Zwiebach Oracle.
Considerations for XBRL Software Development Karl Busch Ernst & Young LLP November 5, 2003 XBRL Software Requirements for the Development of XBRL Taxonomy.
The views expressed in this presentation are those of the presenter, not necessarily those of the IASB or IFRS Foundation. International Financial Reporting.
 Mark & Sons Future Technology Co. (hereafter, MSFT) is a $40 billion public company that provides high-technology products and services.  Currently,
1 1 Roadmap to an IEPD What do developers need to do?
Bringing XBRL tax filing to the UK Jeff Smith, Customer Contact, Online Services,
Product Offering Overview CONFIDENTIAL AND PROPRIETARY Copyright ©2004 Universal Business Matrix, LLC All Rights Reserved The duplication in printed or.
The Project AH Computing. Functional Requirements  What the product must do!  Examples attractive welcome screen all options available as clickable.
Fujitsu’s XBRL Activities Makoto Koizumi Fujitsu Limited 2006 May 16th.
XBRL Voluntary Program on the EDGAR System April 2005 Brigitte Lippmann Attorney Division of Corporation Finance Jeffrey Naumann Enabling Technologies.
XBRL Formula in use: Improving the quality of data Mark Montoya (FDIC) Víctor Morilla (Central Bank of Spain)
12 December, 2012 Katrin Heinze, Bundesbank CEN/WS XBRL CWA1: European Filing Rules CWA1Page 1.
25th June 2008ECCBSO - XBRL filings with Central banks European Committee of Central Balance Sheet Data Offices XBRL filings with central banks Amsterdam,
Web Development Process Description
XBRL and Financial Reporting SLA - Investment Services Section and College & University Business Libraries (CUBL) Section June 5, 2007.
The CBSO project - Experience and issues Madrid, 05 October 2006 Camille Dümm Pascal Rodrique Central Balance Sheet Office.
AICT5 – eProject Project Planning for ICT. Process Centre receives Scenario Group Work Scenario on website in October Assessment Window Individual Work.
XBRL (Xtensible Business Reporting Language) is Coming: Are You Ready? Pertemuan 12 Matakuliah: F0122 – Seminar Akuntansi Tahun: 2009.
Data Profiling
What is Oracle Hyperion Planning  Centralized, web- based Budgeting and Planning application  Combines Operational and Financial measures to improve.
XBRL Tools Roadmap - Interstage XWand - Toshimitsu SUZUKI FUJITSU LIMITED.
Assurance on XBRL Instance Documents: The Case of United Technologies Corporation University of Waterloo Efrim Boritz Won Gyun No UWCISA - 5th Symposium.
Research Framework for Examining XBRL Software to Extend Taxonomies and Create Instance Documents Diane Janvrin (Iowa State) Maureen Mascha (Marquette.
Second Annual Japan CDISC Group (JCG) Meeting 28 January 2004 Julie Evans Director, Technical Services.
© 2008 IBM Corporation ® IBM Cognos Business Viewpoint Miguel Garcia - Solutions Architect.
Advanced Accounting Information Systems Day 38 Current State of XBRL November 30, 2009.
1 Credits Prepared by: Rajendra P. Srivastava Ernst & Young Professor University of Kansas Sponsored by: Ernst & Young, LLP (August 2005) XBRL Module Part.
Participating in the SEC’s XBRL filing program – implementation framework Presented at Northern California OAUG January 17, 2008 Presented by: Jay Chandran,
ENHANCING IFRS EXTERNAL REPORTING USING XBRL
1 XBRL Pilot Project at BOJ May 2004 Yoshiaki Wada Bank Examination and Surveillance Department Bank of Japan © 2004 Bank of Japan.
Managing the IFRS-GP Taxonomy Mai 17, 2006, Madrid Overview of the IFRS-GP Extension Framework, Versioning Issues and Maintenance Considerations Josef.
Copyright 2008 FUJITSU LIMITED Preparer Track: Getting Started - Tools for SEC Filing October 16 th, 2008 SAKAKIBARA Hiroaki Fujitsu Limited.
XBRL for regulatory reporting in Belgium Camille Dümm Central Balance Sheet Office (CBSO) Update on the CBSO latest developments and related projects.
GSBPM and GAMSO Steven Vale UNECE
XBRL ® Moving beyond static taxonomy management David Scott Stokes, Director Asia Pacific
Oracle’s EPM System and Strategy
ING XBRL Proof of Concept July 19, ©2005 page 2. Utilizing XBRL  ING Objectives  Benefits  Goals  Proof of Concept Plan  Stat  USGAAP  Pain.
XBRL – Preparer’s Viewpoint John Stantial Director of Financial Reporting United Technologies Corporation.
Tagged Data Initiative (XBRL) Brigitte Lippmann Attorney Division of Corporation Finance Eric J. Schuppenhauer Senior Advisor to the Chief Accountant Office.
ISIS Project Status Report May 18, 2006 Prepared by MAXIMUS, Inc Education Systems Division for the ABT Committee.
Company Regulator Problem = Exchange of data between regulated entity and regulator Regulator solution = Use XML Schema to define terms for exchange. Regulator.
IS 356 IT for Financial Services
Systems Analysis and Design
Managers’ briefing: Why XBRL?
Overview of the XBRL-US Financial Reporting Taxonomy Framework
Gibraltar Financial Services Commission
Order-to-Cash (Project-Based Services) Scenario Overview
Our Client: Global Investment Bank -with over 700 offices in 28 countries Net revenues were $19.1 billion, and profits $3.0 billion ( 2002)
Order-to-Cash (Project-Based Services) Scenario Overview
X-DIS/XBRL Phase 2 Kick-Off
©Semansys Technologies
AICT5 – eProject Project Planning for ICT
Presentation transcript:

XBRL Tools – An Overview of the Current Status Copenhagen, Denmark – November 2007 Hugh Wallis Director of Technical Standards XBRL International Inc.

Welcome!! Welcome to XBRL Denmark as a full Jurisdiction of XBRL International

Agenda  Types of XBRL Implementation  Conformance  Types of Vendor and their Products  New Initiatives in XBRL  Taxonomy Recognition Process  Brief Demonstration  Questions Disclaimer: The list of named vendors in this presentation is NOT an exhaustive list – those not mentioned should not be offended

Types of implementation  What does it mean to have “implemented XBRL”?  Include some form of import/export in existing software  Write customised libraries for processing XBRL artefacts  Write analytic software that relies on source data being in XBRL format  Write stand-alone instance creation products  Write stand-alone taxonomy creation products  Write tools that process XBRL artefacts created using a subset of XBRL or a specific taxonomy or for a specific, narrow, purpose  For each of the above – provide support for optional modules such as dimensions, versioning, formulas (in PWD status) etc.

Conformance  For each of these types of tools how can we determine that they have correctly “implemented” whatever it is they claim to have implemented?  Limit our discussion to the XBRL claims  Conformance suite can only test a tool’s correct consumption (i.e. checking for “legal” XBRL)  To test correct production you need to run a product’s output through a consuming product which passes the conformance suite  XII provides conformance suites for all its standards which vendors can then use to test their products  Such testing is voluntary and claims are not checked by XII (at this time – there is no “certification” programme in effect currently)

Types of Vendor and their Products  Niche XBRL vendors  Large ERP type vendors  Multi-faceted vendors  Middleware vendors  Analytics vendors  “Filings” vendors  “Other” vendors  Open Source initiatives (Note: Consultants and Training organisations are omitted from this list)

Niche XBRL Vendors  Allocation Solutions - USA  Batavia – Netherlands  Corefiling/Decisionsoft - UK  Coyote Reporting - USA  Dynaxys - USA  NeoClarus - USA  Rivet Software - USA  Semansys - Netherlands  Snappy Reports - USA  UBmatrix - USA  etc.

Niche Vendors’ Offerings  Typically have been “in” XBRL for years and built large part of business around the technology  Pervasive throughout the other “categories” of Vendor  Taxonomy Creation  Latest generation include collaborative environments  Manual Instance Creation  XBRL Validation  “Plug ‘n Play” libraries  Frequently incorporated into other vendors’ tools “under the hood”  Report Generation – Rendering of XBRL  Custom add-ons  e.g. Upstream validation – FFEIC/FDIC implementation

Large ERP type Vendors  Microsoft  FRx, Navision  eReport eXelerator - Excel add-in  F.R.I.D.A. - Financial Reports Instance Documents Application in Microsoft Office InfoPathFinancial Reports Instance Documents Application  Oracle  In Japan for years – now slowly moving to mainstream support, esp. with various acquisitions, the latest being Hyperion – sponsor of Vancouver Conference next week.  SAP  XBRL 2.0 support (output only) in 2002  Not much since but believe they are quietly “getting ready”  Recent acquision of Cartesis and Business Objects gives some XBRL capability  IBM  Numerous partnerships with Niche vendors including UBmatrix and JustSystems  Recent acquisition of Cognos may produce additional XBRL capability  etc.  Issue is the typical “chicken and egg” – customer demand versus product availability conundrum so slow progress in this arena  These companies able to produce rapidly once they believe the time is right

Multi-faceted vendors  Fujitsu  Hitachi  JustSystems  Unisys Corp.  etc.

Middleware vendors  Almost all of the “niche” and “multi-faceted” vendors plus:  Ipedo  etc.  Dynaxys has a big XBRL GL focus  ETL (Extract, Transform and Load) vendors are a hole here

Analytics Vendors  Business Objects (Cartesis – now SAP)  Caseware  Cognos (now IBM)  CompSci Resources  EDGAR Online  Highridge Technologies  Hyperion (now Oracle) – output only though at this stage  Ipedo  IRA  Rivet (Crossfire)  Savanet  Template Software  etc.

United Technologies Corporation Future 10-Q Process Flow ERP Qtr FS in XBRL Edgar HFM XBRL Tagged ERP Supplemental Data XBRL Tagged Total Process Time: 700 Hours

“Filings” vendors  American Financial Printing  Bowne and Co.  Capital Systems  Command Financial Press  Corefiling (UK and USA)  CT Corporation  EDGAR filings  RR Donnelley  TNT Filings (Canada)

“Other” vendors/tools creators  Covers other kinds of support such as Big Accounting Firms’ customised tools  Often use libraries or customised products from niche vendors in combination with some “in house” development  Various European Central Banks  Various Stock Exchanges  Japan  China  Korea  etc.  SEC  “Software as a Service”  Microsoft/RR Donnelley – “FR Live” (in prototype)

Open Source  Code created either by individuals or companies and released under various forms of Open Source licence  Either published privately or on websites like Sourceforge  Galexy  SEC  UBmatrix  Various initiatives from China  Sourceforge publications often seek collaborative development input from others

Where to find them  Companies that are XBRL consortium members and have provided information to XBRL International are listed on our website as a service to them and the public.

New Initiatives in XBRL  Dimensions  Rendering  Functions  Versioning  XBRL GLs  All handled by Working Groups – see

Dimensions  Dimensions Specification 1.0 recommended  Provides standard way of expressing dimensional metadata  Builds on existing taxonomy syntax mechanisms  Design should facilitate code-reuse when implementing  In use today by numerous projects  Vendors already implementing it  Spec needs “care and feeding” based on implementation experience – both errata corrections and “best practices” documentation  Does not address metadata for time and entity dimensions  Task currently assigned to the Base Specification and Maintenance Working Group

Formulas  Formula spec designed to a)Overcome limitations of calculation linkbase b)Provide ability to express business rules for more complex instance validation – or quality analysis c)Provide mechanism to infer information from that carried in an instance – “fact producing”  Complex topic – significant discussions on many thorny aspects happening  Dependent on functions work

Formulas (contd.)  Very actively under development  CR of requirements originally published  Completely reworked and a draft specification published at PWD maturity level  Feedback solicited from the public and much received from many quarters 2 nd PWD produced and currently being commented on

Rendering  Provide a standard method to define an end user representation of the content of an XBRL instance  Builds on Market Analysis document prepared by former Domain WG  Functional Requirements PWD issued  Feedback received from many quarters  Currently evaluating numerous different technical approaches already implemented or in prototype  May eventually produce either a standard specification or a standard method or a combination of the two

Functions  XBRL Functions library  XBRL-aware function interfaces  Registry – proposal being evaluated  allows additional functions to be defined from time to time  encourage further development of the library in a standard way  First version of Requirements are CR –  First PWD of Specification released on  Many additional function interfaces needed – participation is the key

Versioning  The only constant in life is change  Over time rules change so  Taxonomies change  Instances, to be comparable, over time need to be interpreted in the context of those changes  Need to document in a standard way the changes to facilitate this  Becoming important to many parties  COREP/FINREP  National Bank of Belgium  IASCF  US-GAAP  Netherlands Taxonomy Project  First PWD should be released within the next week (approval to publish expected from the XSB today)

XBRL GL  Not a spec but a Taxonomy  Has specific, unusual, modular architecture  Supported by GLTFTA and GLIS (parallel FRTA and FRIS)  Achieved RECOMMENDATION Status – see  Provides means to represent ledger type information  Need to map to existing accounting systems  Can benefit from specific software implementations  Opportunity to build interface between ledger level and report level reporting – SRCD – first public working draft released recently

Taxonomy Recognition Process  Process necessary before XII will list your taxonomy on the XBRL.ORG website - optional  Two levels of recognition  Acknowledged  Approved  Both require taxonomy to be publicly available, royalty free (although copyright may be retained by the owner)  Acknowledged – requires only XBRL Specification Validity  Approved – requires additional “quality” constraints – must have been “Acknowledged” first  Revised (simplified based on feedback) process about to be published  Will need further refining to handle frequently updated taxonomies  See

Demonstration  JustSystems – Financial mashup

Mixing and Mashing Up XBRL with other Financial XMLs Stock Feeds & XBRL

InstancesTaxonomies XBRL enhances information at every stage Taxonomy BorrowerBank Loan Info. Financial Statements Financial Statements Data Acceptance Credit Decision Credit Risk Monitoring / Management Loan Application Publish Acceptance Approval Data Collection Web Services Credit Assessment Store Analysis Supplement Store Analysis Instance Store Validation Monitoring Management Store XML Object Repository

System-System Boundary ・・・

Man-Man Boundary ・・・

XML ・・・ Boundary をなくすための情報共通基盤

これまでの XML アプリの開発手法の限界

Stock price data XBRL Data Calculated data

これまでの XML アプリの開発手法の限界

Questions?