Business Vocabularies in XML (or, Toward a Universal Business Language) Eve Maler, Sun Microsystems

A little about me My specialties are: –XML information modeling –Standards development and facilitation I’m on the OASIS UBL Technical Committee and I chair a major subcommittee I fill several key roles on the SAML standard effort In previous lives I helped develop DocBook, XML itself, XLink, Pipeline, and more –And wrote a book on SGML DTD design methodology Now it’s your turn…

Agenda Promises, promises EDI and ebXML The UBL problem space Making UBL happen ebXML Core Components The UBL modeling methodology Designing the UBL schemas Contextualizing UBL UBL status Resources

Promises, promises

The promise of XML for e-business? Plug ‘n’ play electronic commerce Spontaneous trade No custom programming Ubiquity on the Internet Dirt-cheap tools Complete platform independence

Unfortunately, it’s not that simple It’s very difficult, and maybe not even desirable, to take the humans out of business –Building trust relationships –Exception handling XML is just a metalanguage –Tag soup doesn’t give you interoperability –Seamless communication requires shared meaning –Shared meaning requires semantic standardization across whole industries –This is where UBL comes in

The Universal Business Language An XML-based business language standard- in-progress Leverages existing EDI and XML B2B Applicable across all industry sectors and domains of electronic trade Actually modular, reusable, and extensible Non-proprietary and committed to freedom from royalties Intended to become a legal standard for international trade

UBL offers some realistic e-business promises Genuine advantages over EDI and proprietary/vertical XML B2B: –Lower cost of integration, both among and within enterprises –Lower cost of commercial software –Easier learning curve –Lower cost of entry –Quicker adoption by small and medium-size enterprises (SMEs) –Standardized training –Universally available pool of skilled workers

EDI and ebXML

The EDI stack

Some EDI pressure points It’s hard to get in the game Private networks are expensive You need to do extensive point-to-point negotiation The interchange pipe is large, with infinite possible subsets You use a “soft” mechanism for adapting to special business contexts

The ebXML initiative It was a joint 18-month effort of: –OASIS (Organization for the Advancement of Structured Information Standards) –UN/CEFACT (United Nations Centre for Trade Facilitation and Electronic Business) Over 1000 international participants The vision: a global electronic marketplace Enterprises of any size, anywhere, can: –Find each other electronically –Conduct business by exchanging XML messages ebXML work continues in several venues

The ebXML stack

ebXML modules for infrastructure ebXML Message Service (ebMS) –Secure, reliable messaging built on SOAP with Attachments –Has bindings to HTTP and SMTP Business Process Schema Specification (BPSS) –Business process descriptions in XML Collaboration Protocol Profile/Agreement (CPP/CPA) –Description of business partners’ technical abilities and agreements about business collaboration Registry/Repository (Reg/Rep) –Submission, query, and retrieval of e-business artifacts, with rich metadata

ebXML work on payloads Core Components –Syntax-neutral catalog of idealized, context-free business semantics –Able to be mapped to EDI, XML, or other syntaxes –More on this later Context Methodology –Part of Core Components work –Initial cut at methods for applying business context to Core Components and doing assembly

An ebXML usage scenario

ebXML status The infrastructure specifications are all maturing; most are past V2.0 –The Reg/Rep spec has been approved as an OASIS Standard The payload specs are in active development Conformance tests are being developed Industry groups are endorsing ebXML –OTA, AIAG, RosettaNet, and more Products, open source implementations, interop events, and pilots are happening Both “sanction” and “traction” are well on their way

The UBL problem space

Some basic requirements Semantic clarity through a binding from Core Components to a syntax Choosing XML as that syntax! Royalty-free IPR Usable “on the cheap” No ties to particular back-end implementations Urgency

The requirement for context “Standard” business components need to be different in different business contexts –Addresses differ in Japan vs. the U.S. –Addresses in the auto industry differ from those for other industries –Invoice items for shoes need size information; for coffee, they need grind information These differences need to be accommodated without sacrificing interoperability

UBL proposes to meet all these requirements

Making UBL happen

The standards venue UBL is being developed in an OASIS Technical Committee –Like most of the follow-on ebXML infrastructure projects –(The follow-on Core Components and Business Process projects are in UN/CEFACT) OASIS offers: –An objective process –Openness of its work to public view in real time –Easy and inexpensive opportunities to join Jon Bosak (F.O.X.) is the chair and main founder

Some UBL participants APACS Boeing Commerce One Danish Bankers Association France Telecom General Electric Government of Hongkong Government of Korea HP Intuit KPMG LMI Northrup Grumman Oracle PricewaterhouseCoopers SAP SeeBeyond Sterling Commerce Sun Microsystems UK Cabinet Office United Parcel Service U.S. GSA U.S. Navy Visa International

UBL’s relationship with ebXML UBL is not actually an “ebXML deliverable” UBL mandates no particular messaging framework But we hope the combination will enable the “B2B web” –HTTP + HTML = web publishing –ebXML + UBL = web commerce

Development strategies Start with the low-hanging fruit –The 20% of documents and business objects actually used by 80% of electronic business partners Defer the rocket science to later phases –Produce useful, concrete outputs ASAP Don’t start with a blank slate –We are working from xCBL 3.0 –But with no expectations of backwards compatibility Take advantage of domain expertise –Get XML experts and business experts together and form liaisons

Formal liaisons so far Industry groups –ACORD (insurance industry) –ARTS (retail sales) –EIDX (electronics industry) –RosettaNet (IT industry) –XBRL (accounting professionals) De jure standards organizations –ANSI X12 (EDI) –UN/CEFACT (EDI)

UBL subcommittee organization Modeling and content –Library Content –Context Drivers –(future domain-specific) XML representation and mechanisms –Naming and Design Rules –Context Methodology –Tools and Techniques Administrative functions –Marketing –Liaison –Subcommittee chairs

Planned deliverables Phase 1: 2002 The UBL Library –Reusable building blocks and standard document types Schema design rules –How to represent UBL in XML/XSD –How external modules can best work with UBL Simple context methodology –How to add context-based extensions to UBL Phase 2: 2003 Full-blown context methodology –How to describe your extensions in “recombinant” fashion

Business document scope Common building blocks –“Leaf” and aggregate Procurement –Purchase order, PO response, PO change Materials management –Advance ship notice, planning schedule, goods receipt Payment –Commercial invoice, remittance advice Transport/logistics –Consignment status request and report, bill of lading Catalogs –Price catalog, product catalog Statistical reports –Accounting report

More about the UBL Library deliverables The normative W3C XML Schema (XSD) modules Documentation Potentially several non-normative forms: –UML –ASN.1 –Other schema representations –Modified XSD Potentially stylesheets for: –Viewing UBL documents –Generating EDI-compliant instances A secondary deliverable will be Core Components feedback

Design principles Straightforward Internet use “Various and sundry” tools Legibility Simplicity 80/20 rule Component reuse Provide one way to encode information Customization and maintenance Context sensitivity Prescriptiveness, tempered Content orientation XML technology Namespace dependency caution Legacy format non-goal xCBL subset non-goal (Schema generation) … …

ebXML Core Components

Core Components status The Core Components Technical Specification, Part 1, is at V1.8 –Known as CCTS Some features are still a matter of hot debate Additional Core Components Supplementary Documents work is ongoing –Known as CCSD Today’s tutorial reflects the current CCTS specification and not the newer or more controversial areas

A primer

More on Core Component Types CCTs are conceptually similar to the notion of built-in datatypes in XML –The spec offers a closed set of them –But this comparison says nothing about their schema representation, such as simple vs. complex types Current CCTs: –Amount– Measure –Code– Numeric –DateTime– Picture –Graphic– Quantity –Identifier– Text –Indicator

Mapping to data elements CCTS constructs follow ISO –Semantic clarity of data elements (CCs and BIEs) is achieved through careful naming and definition in a dictionary A CC or BIE gets a tripartite dictionary name –The object class to which the data element belongs –A term reflecting its function as a property or distinguishing characteristic of the object class –A representation term (RT) defining the data element’s valid values RTs are closely related to CCTs –Current RTs are Amount, Code, Date, DateTime, Graphic, Identifier, Indicator, Measure, Name, Percent, Picture, Quantity, Rate, Text, Time, and Value – plus Details Example dictionary name: Car.Colour.Code

More on the notion of business context An example of an ACC might be “address” –It’s aggregate because it’s a collection of other CCs –As a CC, it strives to be semantically unique and useful An example of an ABIE might be “buyer address” –As a BIE, it strives to identify the business circumstance in which the CC is used –The dictionary name would be Buyer.Address.Details

Mapping the CC world to XML and XSD (1 of 2) XSD has an indirect cascade of types and elements –With attributes working pretty much the way elements do

Mapping the CC world to XML and XSD (2 of 2) XSD’s OO-like approach can neatly be mapped to ISO object classes and properties

The UBL modeling methodology

The approach

The inputs Documents/expertise from: –The members of the Library Content SC –Organizations with a liaison to the UBL TC –Feedback from the general public xCBL 3.0 –A working XML business vocabulary for several years –Has lots of EDI knowledge baked into it ebXML CCs –Ultimately, as many UBL constructs as possible will be mapped to the final form of CCs –Where there’s no match, this will be fed back to the CC project

The modeling steps 1.Working from an xCBL document type, analyze its constituent constructs to identify BBIEs and ABIEs 2.Establish each BIE’s dictionary name, UBL name, definition, and business context 3.Establish its cardinality/optionality within its object class 4.Identify missing BIEs 5.Identify which BIEs are reusable 6.Assemble an appropriate UBL document type from the BIEs

The formalism A spreadsheet with carefully designed columns

The back end

Samples Schema Instance

Designing the UBL schemas

How the design rules fit into schema creation

Some major design rules developed so far The choice of normative schema language Naming and construction of elements, attributes, and types (mostly done) Modularity, namespaces, and versioning (partial) Embedded schema documentation (draft) Handling code lists

The choice of schema language We chose W3C XML Schema (XSD) –The other seriously considered choices were RELAX NG and Schematron Main positives: –Traction in the industry –Tools availability Main concerns: –Interoperability –Lack of support for Boolean operations We have not foreclosed on generating other schema versions –But they would be non-normative

A taste of the naming rules Dictionary entry names are fully qualified with object class names But using these full names would result in hundreds of extra elements We get reusability by allowing properties (elements) to “inherit” parent object classes (types), XPath-style –Delivery schedule IDs and order IDs could both be called –Each would be identifiable by means of //Order/ID and //DeliverySchedule/ID respectively

The modularity metamodel

Modularity in practice

Embedded documentation Datatypes are annotated with UBL-related metadata XHTML Basic is used in a conventional way to indicate the fields Delivery Schedule...

Encoding code lists UBL will seek to import external datatype definitions in conventional XSD form –Helping external organizations to create rigorous schemas –Defining a unique UBL element for each kind of code It will identify minimal code lists that must be supported –But allow extension in several machine-readable ways Benefits: –Semantic clarity, interoperability, external maintenance, validatability, friendliness to our context methodology, upgradability, readability This design rule is special because it’s not only for a UBL-internal audience –We hope to promote a global code list marketplace with it!

Contextualizing UBL

Context drivers The ebXML work identified eight top context drivers: –Business process –Industry –Product classification –Geopolitical region –Primary and supporting business roles –System capabilities –Official constraints For example, “selling nuclear cereal to Finland” will have specific values along these axes This set probably needs to be extensible

The “eight-space” UBL defines BIEs, not CCs – they have a bit of real context in them –Typically just the business process –Everything else should ideally be “zeroed out” A set of eight values identifies a unique business context –A trading community can associate their schema customizations with it

A draft of Phase 1 – context disclosure In Phase 1 of UBL’s context methodology, customizers will be expected to: –Handcraft an XSD derivation on top of UBL, adhering to XSD extension/restriction rules –Indicate the applicable context driver values through embedded documentation, adhering to UBL context derivation rules A context hierarchy will mirror the XSD type hierarchy There are ebXML reg/rep implications A set of UBL ur-schemas will be created that allow for more flexible derivation –With cardinalities that all start at 0 –But deriving from the ur-schemas won’t count as UBL Library conformance

The plan for Phase 2 – machine application of context Customizers will be able to describe the desired schema changes in an abstract, “recombinant” way These context rules will be applied by an engine to input schemas to get contextualized schemas A subtle and difficult problem! There are ebXML reg/rep implications

UBL status

Completed work The procurement document types are well along The payment document types will be next The common aggregate types (reusable BIEs) grow with analysis of every document The common leaf types (CCTs) are perfunctory right now The NDR SC intends to put itself out of work by the end of 2002

Meeting schedule The UBL TC meets only F2F; it has met four times since October/November 2001 –We often try to co-locate with groups with which we have liaisons –F2F #5 is 1-4 October 2002 in Burlington, MA, USA – ballots are allowed by our rules The larger SCs meet frequently by phone and do some work by –The main foci are the Library Content (LC) SC and the Naming and Design Rules (NDR) SC If you’re interested in joining, let me know –You must be an organizational or individual OASIS member –Individual membership is US$250/year

Resources

Where to find more information OASIS UBL TC – – – – –White papers, presentations, and specifications are available –All mailing list archives are open to public view ebXML – Core Components –

How to comment The UBL comment list is open to all –Archive: lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ubl-comment –Signup: lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl The Library Content and NDR SCs have spreadsheet forms for providing feedback

Thanks! Questions?