MHonArc v2.5.0b2 -->
ubl message
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]
Subject: RE: [ubl] Suggested Plan for Supporting Material and SBS deliverables
Title: RE: [ubl] Suggested Plan for Supporting Material and SBS deliverables
Tim,
CrimsonLogic has already developed the CoO BPSS. I'll make it an agenda item in the next TSC concall on Thursday (2/3) at 10am to discuss the CoO BPSS an.
Rgds
kama
-----Original Message-----
From: Tim McGrath [mailto:tmcgrath@portcomm.com.au]
Sent: Sun 2/26/2006 10:02 AM
To: ubl@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [ubl] Suggested Plan for Supporting Material and SBS deliverables
At last week's TC meeting I was asked to come up with a plan of what
deliverables we would need to both co-ordinate the supporting material
from the Procurement and Transportation subcommitees and also satisfy
the requirements for SBS and ebBP models.
I first identified 4 work items:
* SBS profiles - spreadsheet models with SBS requirements marked
* Business Process definitions - ebBP schemas
* Use case definitions - worksheet format
* Sample Instances of documents
Plotting the current status of these in each subcommitee, I get:
* SBS profiles - Procurement = YES, Transportation = NO (we could extend
the SBS to include the seller as an consignor exporting the goods)
* Business Process definitions - Procurement = YES, Transportation = NO
(following from the above we could add ebBP schemas for 'initiating
transport services')
* Use case definitions - Procurement = NO (we could transpose the Danish
scenarios and SBS scope into worksheets), Transportation = YES
* Sample Instances of documents - Procurement = ??? (SBS just posted and
Peter is working on others), Transportation = NO (waiting for completion
of worksheets)
However while work is progressing in most areas we could try to connect
them by adopting a common scenario/case study. In other words it would
be much more meaningful to have the supplier of the goods in the
instances to also be the consignor and the same items on the Order
becoming goods on the Waybill. The process may look something like the
attached diagram.
To avoid confusion it may be better to call this a "Sample Subset"
(although it would contain the SBS subset for procurement).
This way we not only get a consistent set of deliverables but the
examples connect together.
Any thoughts?
--
regards
tim mcgrath
phone: +618 93352228
postal: po box 1289 fremantle western australia 6160
DOCUMENT ENGINEERING: Analyzing and Designing Documents for Business Informatics and Web Services
http://www.docengineering.com/
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]