A way to proceed

1
A way to proceed

• Martin Forsberg

2
We have a few problems with huge impact on
development and adoption

• We have
• No control over versioning
• Names and definitions that confuses us and the
  end users
• A harmonization process that takes years

3
All TBGs ? One library ? One reusable schema ?
One major version number
Harmonized Library
TBG 17
ICG
Working CCL
4
Approved library
ATG2
ICG
RAM Reusable Component XML Schema
CCL08A
urnununeceuncefactdatadraftRe
Version 6
5
The namespace and version problem

• CCL06A
• urnununeceuncefactdatadraftReusableAggregat
  eBusinessInformationEntity2
• Version 2
• CII urnununeceuncefactdatadraftCrossIndust
  ryInvoice1
• Version 1
• CCL06B
• urnununeceuncefactdatadraftReusableAggregat
  eBusinessInformationEntity3
• Version 3
• CCL07A
• urnununeceuncefactdatadraftReusableAggregat
  eBusinessInformationEntity4
• Version 4
• CCL07B
• urnununeceuncefactdatadraftReusableAggregat
  eBusinessInformationEntity5
• Version 5
• CCL08A
• urnununeceuncefactdatadraftReusableAggregat
  eBusinessInformationEntity6
• Version 6
• CII
• urnununeceuncefactdatadraftCrossIndustryInv
  oice2

It doesnt matter what was changed in CII, it
must be a Major upgrade
6
Every update is Major

• If the reusable schema is updated in a major way
  (namespace change) then the document must also be
  updated with a major version
• Affects the documents in a backward incompatible
  way
• Every new version will be backward incompatible
• Even if we consider the change to be a minor or
  revision, it MUST be a major because of the
  common reusable library

7
How do we solve this?

• Split and isolate the library into smaller
  libraries defined by the TBGs

Supply Chain
Con-struction
Harmonized Library
Agri-culture
E-Gov
8
Well, people will say But we will not have
ABIEs that are reusable cross domain in that
case!

• True, but we dont have it now anyway!!!
• The Trade_ BIEs cant be used by other TBGs
• Today we need to keep track on the owner of
  each component
• Consider this example!

9
TBG1 has an ABIE called Trade_Contact and needs
to add the ASBIE for Skype-name. We cant use
the Specified_ Communication, already defined
by TBG1 because it has no channel-code.
TBG1 looks in the library and finds Universal_
Communication that seems to be appropriate
Sure, it covers more than we need, but reuse can
be a good thing.
But, wait a minute!! Whats that? Specified_
Preference?
10
We now have a new ABIE Preference in the Cross
Industy-schema And a Specified_ Period
But we already have a Period-ABIE in our
schemas!! It is called Trade_ Period and doesnt
look like the Specified one
So we create a new ABIE for Skype Communication,
that reuses our ABIEs
11

• So by reusing other domains ABIEs you also get
  their associated ABIEs
• If TBG1 reuses Consignment from TBG2, we will
  also have Cross-Border_ Party in our schemas
  (the Cross-Border_ Party looks very differently
  from the Trade_ Party
• TBG1 has to make its own Consignment-ABIE more or
  less identical to TBG2 except from the associated
  ABIEs.

12
And this happens all the time

• So we are in reality already building isolated
  libraries
• Thats why we need those funny names
• Cross-Border_ Address
• Tendering_ Address
• Cross-Border_ Party
• Tendering_ Party
• Trade_ Party

TBG1
TBG2
TBG6
The ABIEs name signals which partition of the
library it belongs in
13
Isolated libraries solve more problems

• Each isolated library would render its own
  reusable schema (and namespace)
• The TBG can then make a change impact analysis
• The user community can actually use the standard
  over a long period of time
• The strange naming wouldnt be necessary
• The Party in SupplyChainLibrary would
• be called Party!
• The namespace would give the context, not the
  ABIE-name!