1 UBL TSC Report November 6, 2006 Kamarudin Tambi Chair of OASIS UBL TSC CrimsonLogic Pte Ltd. OASIS UBL TC Singapore Meeting

2 Members of TSC Kamarudin TambiCrimsonLogic Pte Ltd Ralph HoDTTN Tim McGrathUBL TC Vice Chair Eric TesoroCrimsonLogic Pte Ltd. Ng Chi YuenCECID HongKong (till end-Dec 05) Andrew SchokaUSDOT Representative David FitzpatrickBooz Allen Hamilton Mike OnderUSDOT (guest) ■Chair ■Co-Chair ■Members

3 Recent Activities (Weekly Concall) - Six documents were included in the UBL 2.0 public review - Packing List, Forwarding Instruction - Bill of Lading, Waybill - Certificate of Origin, Freight Invoice - Transport Status - Develop sample XML instance for Forwarding Instruction, Transport Status and Certificate of Origin (to be further improved) - Develop the initial UBL Basic International Trade Scenario - Derived from Denmarks OIOUBL document - Work in progress - Review and provide TBG3’s Resolution 3

4 UBL BITS - Basic International Trade Scenario -Describes the business scenario related to the UBL Basic International Trade process -Provided to demonstrate a basic, and therefore theoretical, use of UBL document exchanges -Contains sample parties and sample data -Work in progress

5 TBG3’s Resolution 3 Cooperation with OASIS/UBL Transportation Subcommittee on UBL release 2.0 TBG3 has acknowledged the release of UBL 2.0 published for a second public review period and is disappointed that a number of fundamental issues raised by TBG3 at the January 2006 first review period, are still pending for consideration within the next UBL 3.0 release. TBG 3 will only be able to concur with the Transport related parts of any UBL releases provided that the requirements of TBG3 are fulfilled in terms of the consistency between UBL business processes and data models and the TBG3/UNeDocs BRS and Core Components data model. TBG3 resolves to invite the UBL-TSC to participate in its work and TBG3 will communicate any deliverables produced to UBL. TBG3 stresses again the need that TBG/FMG concludes the agreement between OASIS/UBL and UN/CEFACT regarding their overall working relationship.

6 Response to TBG3’s Resolution 3 The UBL Transportation Subcommittee is surprised and also disappointed that we have failed to communicate our intention with regard to accommodating the concerns of TBG3 following the recent public review of UBL version 2.0. Given our limited time and resources we have had to restrict the scope of the business processes covered by UBL 2.0. This is not to say we do not recognize the limitations TBG3 have identified, only that we could not address them in a meaningful way in time to meet the UBL 2.0 schedule. In fact, UBL version 2.0 is now completed and currently being ratified by OASIS, to be published in December It is regrettable but true that the participants in the UBL Transportation Subcommittee are mostly self funded and so attending face-to-face meetings is not always feasible. This has been unfortunate. For example, had UBL been able to participate in the recent Barcelona meeting of TBG3 we might have avoided such a misunderstanding of our intentions. Be assured, UBL is committed to moving its work into CEFACT. We believe we have a formal agreement with the CEFACT Plenary to do this. Accordingly, the UBL Transportation Subcommittee is committed to working collaboratively with TBG3 on future developments, and wishes to work together to find constructive ways to do so given the practical difficulties of face-to-face meetings. One such development could be the extension and refinement of the Transportation Status document. This appears to be a worthwhile task that would allow us to take an existing UBL document together with implementation experience from the US Dept. of Transport's EFM project and develop both a business process and data model consistent with both TBG3 and UN/eDocs. The resulting artifacts can then be submitted as UN/CEFACT deliverables. Such a work programme mirrors a similar collaboration between UBL and TBG1. To conclude, the UBL Transportation Subcommittee takes Resolution 3 from your Barcelona meeting very seriously. Whilst we do not believe we have acted incorrectly in these matters, we do believe a more proactive approach in communicating our intentions accurately is essential.

7 Thank you