1. Slide 1 Singapore Plenary November 6 - 9 2006

2. Slide 2 Monday 6 th Nov. 09:00-09:15 Meet & greet; room assignments and other meeting logistics 09:15-12:00 Opening plenary Introductions 10:30-10:45 Coffee Subcommittee and team reports Other reports Work/meeting schedule review 12:00-13:30 Welcome Lunch 13:30-17:00 Plenary UBL 2.0 International Data Dictionary (IDD) - Localization of UBL 2.0 UBL structural review 15:00-15:15 Coffee

3. Slide 3 Tuesday 7 th Nov. 09:00-09:15 Work team coordination & setup 09:15-10:30 Plenary Code List Value Validation Methodology (CLVVM) - Edit document Support package - Sample Implementation Guide from Denmark 12:00-13:00 Lunch 13:00-17:00 Plenary UBL Customization Methodology - Customization white paper - Schema customization practicum - UBL 2.0 Small Business Subset (SBS) review - Toolkit 17:30 Night Zoo Dinner

4. Slide 4 Wednesday 8 th Nov. 09:00-09:15 Work team coordination & setup 09:15-12:00 Plenary 1. UBL 2.0 Naming and Design Rules (NDR) - ATG2 NDR gap analysis 2. Support package - UBL Basic International Trade Scenario (BITS) 12:00-13:00 Lunch 13:00-17:00 Plenary 1. UBL 2.0 Naming and Design Rules (NDR) - ATG2 NDR gap analysis 2. Support package: - HISC mapping of new document types to Layout Keys - Code List support Wednesday evening: Social event TBA

5. Slide 5 Thursday 9 th Nov. 09:00-09:15 Work team coordination & setup 09:15-12:00 Plenary Marketing and promotion of UBL 2.0 End-to-end usability development Procedures for maintenance of UBL 2.0 12:00-13:00 Lunch Telecon with TBG3 13:00-17:00 Closing plenary Schedule review

6. Slide 6 Friday 10 th Nov. 09:00-12:00 Working Sessions as required 13:40-17:20 UBL Public Forum

7. Slide 7 Why are we here?

8. Slide 8 The UBL Objective HTTP + HTML = Web Publishing = Web Commerce ebXML/WS + UBL

9. Slide 9 ebXML UBL’s Ancestry XML EDI CBL EDIFACT X12 UBL XCBL

10. Slide 10 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.

11. Slide 11 The Machine Screw Principle discovered around 400 BC Limited use until machine tools made mass production possible (18th cent.) Every machine shop and foundry made unique sizes and thread dimensions 1841: Joseph Whitworth presented “The Uniform System of Screw-Threads” to Britain’s Institute of Civil Engineers 1864: William Sellers proposes “On a Uniform System of Screw Threads” for the United States. 1942: British tanks required US parts. 1945: British and American standards merged Enabled interchangeable parts and tooling for mechanization and mass production A lead time of 2300 years! Courtesy of Clive Holtham, Cass Business School

12. Slide 12 Paperless Document Exchange Principles developed around 1950. Limited interoperability until Internet and XML made cheap electronic distribution possible (1995). Every organization or industry used unique format, syntax and semantics. 1980: ANSI developed “The X12 Data Interchange Standard” for US business. 1990: UN developed “The EDIFACT Data Interchange Standard” for global business. 2000: OASIS and UN/CEFACT developed electronic business with XML (ebXML) framework. 2004: UBL (version 1) released. So we are not there yet… –only another 2244 years to go!

13. Slide 13 Standards Success Factors Formalized… Has sanction. De Jure. Widely adopted … Has traction. De Facto. History tells us traction is more important than sanction Internet versus ISO/OSI. So sanction is only a means to achieve traction not a goal in itself. What makes a standard is adoption.

14. Slide 14 UBL is Real Traction: –Is being rapidly adopted for government procurement. –Yet applies across all industry sectors and international trade. –Government adoption drives software integration. Sanction: –Developed and maintained in a completely open and accountable standards process that allows any interested person or organization to participate. –Is an international standard recognized under the MOU between all international standards bodies. –Collaboration with UN/CEFACT for future development.

15. Slide 15 UBL has Sanction An approved OASIS Standard –1.0 in May 2004 –@ version 2.0 in December 2006 Based on ebXML Core Components. –ISO 15000-5 compliant –Early adopter and pioneer UBL further development will be in collaboration with UN/CEFACT. UBL 2.0 is on track to become an international standard.

16. Slide 16 INTERNATIONAL ELECTROTECHNICAL COMMISSION INTERNATIONAL TELECOMMUNICATION UNION UNITED NATIONS ECONOMIC COMMISSION FOR EUROPE Sanctioning eBusiness Standards

17. Slide 17 Specific Technology Consortia OASIS XML standards for e-business Collaborates with UN/CEFACT on the ebXML World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) Web infrastructure standards The Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Internet standards

18. Slide 18 But wait, there’s more… Industry solutions developed to fill a requirement not met by other standards: – Rosettanet, XBRL, OAGIS, GS1, etc. – Gain momentum and become a standards business. National bodies: – CEN/ISSS, NIST, CNIS, SITPRO Proprietary or private solutions. There is a natural selection at play. – The market will decide. – But only if given the correct information.

19. Slide 19 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.

20. Slide 20 UBL has Traction Adopted for a variety of contexts: –Government e-procurement. –International trade. Based on library of re-usable components. Active user community contributing to further development and enhancements. –Credibility within XML community. A feature of an Open Standard is no auditing of usage. –‘Viral’ adoption

21. Slide 21 UBL is Royalty Free OASIS IPR Policy –Royalty Free on Limited Terms –Preferred by Open Source developers Each participating party agrees that it will grant to any other party a patent license to implement the UBL specification. “Limited Terms” means participating parties may not impose any further conditions or restrictions For complete conditions refer to: http://www.oasis-open.org/who/intellectualproperty.php

22. Slide 22 UBL 1.0 UBL 2.0 UBL’s Adoption Life-cycle

23. Slide 23 UBL Future Work The next version of UBL will be a collaboration with UN/CEFACT: –This is underway. –A long term migration path for UBL users. Maintenance and support of UBL version 2 remains with the OASIS UBL Technical Committee. –Minor releases, errata, extensions, etc –Backward compatible with UBL 2.0 Use UBL today and tomorrow.

24. Slide 24 Open Work Items

25. Slide 25 UBL Naming and Design Rules A normative set of XML schema design rules and naming conventions XML constructs defined in accordance with the ebXML Core Components Technical Specification. UBL NDR 2.0 completed its public review in October 2006. Global Scoping: –In UBL 2.0, all types are globally scoped New Extension Element –An optional UBLExtensions may now appear as the first child of any UBL 2.0 document. –An area in which to include non-UBL data elements –Permits customized documents to be compliant. New Approach to Code List Validation –A two-phase validation approach has been developed to make it easier to modify code lists and perform basic business rule checking. –Extends the functionality of W3C Schema

26. Slide 26 2.0 Support Package Code List support files Sample Implementation Guide from Denmark UBL Basic International Trade Scenario (BITS) Output stylesheets UBL Model Letter of Agreement Source files for Gefeg’s FX and Enterprise Architect’s UML data models. Other ideas?? Release January 2007

27. Slide 27 Localization Subcommittees Translation of UBL semantics. Fostering requirements for local implementations. –Chinese –Japanese –Korean –Spanish –Italian –Danish

28. Slide 28 English514,000,000 Spanish425,000,000 Japanese120,000,000 Korean 60,000,000 Chinese (Mandarin) 1,075,000,000 The Meaning of Internationalization

29. Slide 29 Customizing UBL UBL was designed on an 80/20 principle. 20 % of the library would be useful for 80% of the requirements. The 20% remainder would require a customization of the library. This means 80% of UBL implementations will require some customization to suit their context of use. –Restriction and/or Extension UBL is actually a set of building blocks for eBusiness document components.

30. Slide 30 UN/CEFACT Collaboration Status Report

31. Slide 31 UN/ECE CEFACT Plenary (Shareholders) Bureau (Board of Directors) Forum Management Group (Board of Management) Permanent Groups (Workers) TMG (CCTS, UMM) TBG (1-19) ICG ATG (1-2) Forum UN/CEFACT 101

32. Slide 32 UN/CEFACT Collaboration Activities part 1 CEFACT BUREAU/ UBL TC –Mark Palmer and Tim McGrath TBG1 - Supply Chain –completed first analysis TBG3 – Transport –reviewed UBL 2.0 specification –proposing a common work item TBG17 – Harmonization –discussions started TMG/CCTS – Core Component Technical Specification –discussions started

33. Slide 33 UN/CEFACT Collaboration Activities Part 2 ATG/NDR - XML Naming and Design Rules –working team formed –submitted requirements TBG2 – UN/eDocs –unclear how to proceed ICG (and ATG2) – Code Lists –need to engage formally TBG19 e-Government –still immature TMG/Context Methodology/Message Assembly –still immature

34. Slide 34 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 (?) UN/CEFACT Convergence Status