Download presentation
Presentation is loading. Please wait.
1
XBRL Tools – An Overview of the Current Status Copenhagen, Denmark – November 2007 Hugh Wallis Director of Technical Standards XBRL International Inc. hughwallis@xbrl.org
2
Welcome!! Welcome to XBRL Denmark as a full Jurisdiction of XBRL International
3
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
5
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.
6
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)
7
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)
8
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.
9
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
10
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
11
Multi-faceted vendors Fujitsu Hitachi JustSystems Unisys Corp. etc.
12
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
13
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.
14
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
15
“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)
16
“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)
17
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
18
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. http://www.xbrl.org/ProductsandServices/
20
New Initiatives in XBRL Dimensions Rendering Functions Versioning XBRL GLs All handled by Working Groups – see http://www.xbrl.org/WorkingGroups http://www.xbrl.org/WorkingGroups
21
Dimensions Dimensions Specification 1.0 recommended 2006-09-18 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
22
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
23
Formulas (contd.) Very actively under development CR of requirements originally published 2005- 06-21 Completely reworked and a draft specification published at PWD maturity level 2007-02-01 Feedback solicited from the public and much received from many quarters 2 nd PWD produced and currently being commented on
24
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 2007-02-01 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
25
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 – 2005-06-21 First PWD of Specification released on 2006-12-07 Many additional function interfaces needed – participation is the key
26
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)
27
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 2007-04-17 – see http://www.xbrl.org/GLFiles/ http://www.xbrl.org/GLFiles/ 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
29
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 http://www.xbrl.org/TaxonomyRecognitionhttp://www.xbrl.org/TaxonomyRecognition
31
Demonstration JustSystems – Financial mashup
32
Mixing and Mashing Up XBRL with other Financial XMLs Stock Feeds & XBRL
33
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
34
System-System Boundary ・・・
35
Man-Man Boundary ・・・
38
XML ・・・ Boundary をなくすための情報共通基盤
39
これまでの XML アプリの開発手法の限界
40
Stock price data XBRL Data Calculated data
41
これまでの XML アプリの開発手法の限界
46
Questions?
Similar presentations
© 2025 SlidePlayer.com. Inc.
All rights reserved.