1. Proposal for a Revised Technical Framework for UN/CEFACT eProcurement impact 1

2. summary (proposed) Revised Technical Framework: Standardize on semantics not syntax or formats UN/CEFACT ‘core’ semantics establish foundation for interoperability Communities of use create their own implementations Process, components, structures, documents and syntax Statement of conformance Registry of conformant specifications published by UN/CEFACT UN/CEFACT is a facilitator of interoperability between communities eProcurement impact: UN/CEFACT projects will develop… Profiles for eProcurement processes Business requirements, rules and semantics Published as Deliverables for Information Recommendation for use of standards European eInvoicing community (e.g. CEN/BII) develops … European core Invoice Data Model European business requirements, rules and semantics 2

3. REVISED TECHNICAL FRAMEWORK PROPOSAL UN/CEFACT 3

4. Used in ‘core’‘community of use’ business processes components and code lists structures syntax expressions creating a ‘core’ semantic reference for eBusiness 4

5. 1. Union of all usages (A,B,C,D,E,F,G) 2. Designed set (A,C,F,Z) community A B C D E F G A C Z F Everything everyone wants: Xcomplex to understand Xcomplex to maintain (harmonize) enables compliance of legacy/current solutions Xcompliance does not ensure interoperability What we think everyone needs: Xcreates yet another standard Xchallenges compliance of legacy/current solutions compliance ensures interoperability commuity Defining the ‘core’

6. 3. Intersection of all usages (F) F 4. Intersection of common usage (B,C,F,G) B C F G What everyone uses: simple to understand easier to maintain encourages compliance of legacy/current solutions compliance ensures (limited) interoperability What many use: still simple to understand harder to maintain (harmonize) enables compliance to subsets by legacy/current solutions Xcompliance does not ensure interoperability can evolve towards Defining the ‘core’

7. communities of use… Trading environments around specific: – business domains, – industry groups, – regions, – governments, – technologies or – commercial service models Communities contain smaller communities No organization exists in only one community – members overlap – communities form webs not hierarchies They are identified by context – requirements defined by business rules May support disparate implementations by members 7

8. communities specify their own implementation guides Business processes – Establish context of use Document requirements – Invoice, Freight Invoice, Utility Invoice, Bill, etc, etc. – Process determines function NOT name of document Business rules (incl. code lists) – “In cases when invoices are issued in other currencies than the national currency of the seller, the seller may be required to provide information about the VAT total amount in his national currency.” Syntax – EDIFACT, X12, ASN.1, XML Formats – XML vocabularies (UBL, GS1, OAGi, XBRL, ISO20022) 8

9. a revised technical framework for UN/CEFACT International Laws WTO/UN recommendations ‘core’ business processes ‘core’ components ‘core’ structures Trade Agreements messaging protocols Trade Facilitation Recommendations Requirements for Trade Facilitation Core Interoperable Foundation Library Based on standard repository schema Based on standard repository schema syntax expressions of models EDIFACT XML Published in 9

10. Governance CommunitiesImplementations Agriculture Domain UN/CEFACT communities may have different implementations Cross Border Agriculture domain Core Interoperable Foundation Library Conformance to core semantics Conformance to core semantics Conformance to community semantics Conformance to community semantics 10

11. UN/CEFACT semantic foundation ‘identifier’ ‘date’ ‘currency’ ‘rate’ ‘party’ ‘location’ ‘item’ ‘document’ ‘period’ ‘address’ ‘BII invoice transaction model’ ‘UBL common library’ ‘CCL based on CCTS 2.01’ ‘ISO 20022 Financial Invoice’ Used by Communities using common semantics Tax Category Rate Building Flatroof Percent Postal Address 11

12. assurances of conformity Sample: – “This specification is in conformity to the UN/CEFACT Core Interoperable Foundation Library in that it uses the following generic components… – All new components introduced in this specification are defined in reference to these generic components and are consistent with them.”      Communities issue statements of self conformance – no certification It is assumed that the industry will police itself and that most communities will determine that it is in their own best interests to make truthful and accurate claims. 12

13. registry of community specifications IVI Consortium IMS Global Learning Consortium European Commission Joinup Registry Community Specifications 13

14. ISO 20022 Registry 14

15. WHAT IT COULD LOOK LIKE European eInvoicing example 15

16. eInvoice Governance Communities Implementations UN/CEFACT european eInvoicing example UN/CEFACT Procurement domain Core Interoperable Foundation Library BII Profiles BusinessObjects ISO 20022 Universal financial industry message scheme Message definition Focus on this 16

17. Used in ‘core’ 17 a European Profile business process models data models and code lists data structures syntax expression ‘Supplier initiated Invoice’ ‘identifier’ ‘date’ ‘currency’ ‘rate’ ‘party’ ‘location’ ‘item’ ‘document’ ‘period’ ‘address’ ‘common procurement library’ ‘billing process’ ‘invoice syntax mapping’ ‘address type’ ‘invoice transaction requirements’ CORE European INVOICE data model ? using a ‘core’ semantic reference for eInvoicing ‘address details’

18. ‘core’ models ‘supplier initiated Invoice’ ‘identifier’ ‘date’ ‘currency’ ‘rate’ ‘party’ ‘location’ ‘item’ ‘document’ ‘period’ ‘address’ ‘address type’ UN/CEFACT Procurement domain UN/CEFACT Bureau Programme Support UN/CEFACT Bureau Programme Support UN/CEFACT Bureau Programme Support maintained by Used in business process models data models and code lists data structures XML format ‘address details’ Used in EDIFACT format 18

19. The role of CEN/BII specifications 19 BII BII is defining core information requirement models – the set of information elements sufficient to cater for the generally expressed business requirements applicable throughout the European market. BII offers an approach to e- Invoicing interoperability within Europe.

20. the CEN/BII European Profile ‘invoice transaction requirements’ ‘billing process’ ‘invoice format mapping’ CEN/BII UN/CEFACT and OASIS UBL CEN/BII maintained by Used in business process models data models and code lists data structures XML format ‘common procurement library’ CORE European INVOICE data model ? 20

21. HOW IT COULD WORK European eInvoicing example 21

22. using ‘core’ semantics Can we speak in English ? 22

23. UBL Invoice Cross Industry Invoice Financial Invoice UN/CEFACT Core Interoperable Foundation Library European Invoice Semantics European Common Invoice requirements CORE European INVOICE data model ? semantically equivalent 23

24. PEPPOL Community Banking Community UN/CEFACT Core Interoperable Foundation Library European eInvoice exchange European Common Invoice requirements For a banking community member to exchange invoices with a Spanish organization- they can transform documents using European Invoice semantics (defined by CEN-BII), based on UN/CEFACT CIFL Spanish Community semantically equivalent 24

25. POTENTIAL IMPACT ON E-PROCUREMENT PROGRAMME OF WORK UN/CEFACT Revised Technical Framework 25

26. potential impact on eProcurement PoW UN/CEFACT projects will develop Profiles – ‘Deliverables for Information’ rather then ‘Standards’ – ‘core’ industry rather than ‘cross’ industry – Generic semantics rather than documents, syntax or formats – Similar, but not same as BRS and RSM – Processes, rules and requirements – Formalized business rules – Semantic reference models Other activities… – Develop guidelines Assist in implementation support – Develop UNECE Recommendations Such as Recommendations to use certain specifications or standards As with EDIFACT, Layout Key, Codes, etc.. – Attract more business expertise UN/CEFACT eProcurement domain  ‘global version of CEN/BII’ 26

27. Governance Communities (stakeholders of libraries) Implementations Core Components Library 2.01 Community Core Components Library 3.0 Community UN/EDIFACT Community UNTDED-ISO7372 Community A B what happens to current libraries? D C UN/CEFACT Core Interoperable Foundation Library Note: libraries are developed and approved by communities of use 27

28. UN/CEFACT Projects (approved by Bureau) Agriculture Domain what happens to current BRSs? UN/CEFACT Core Interoperable Foundation Library Sectoral PDA Agriculture Domain eCert Crop Data Sheet E-Lab Supply Chain PDA Procurement Domain CI-* CEFM eTendering BRSs developed as Profiles and approved by projects Registered with self conformance in a UN/CEFACT repository Published as UN/CEFACT Deliverables for Information 28

29. Governance CommunitiesImplementations Agriculture Domain Core Components Library 3.0 community A X what happens to current RSMs? UN/CEFACT Core Interoperable Foundation Library Agriculture Industry Group eCert (RSM) Crop Data Sheet (RSM) Procurement Industry Group CII (RSM) CEFM (RSM) eTendering (RSM) Core Components Library 2.01 Specific technical specifications (such as RSM and Schemas) are developed and approved by governance communities May be registered in a UN/CEFACT repository under a self conformance statement as publications based on UN/CEFACT foundation library (stakeholders of current deliverables) 29

30. potential impact on Cross Industry Invoice Publications of CII will become community specifications – Documents, syntax and formats are created by communities of use UN/CEFACT Library is ‘core’ rather than ‘cross industry’ Community requirements drive demand – Should be based on CIFL – Would be published in UN/CEFACT registry Core Component Libraries (based on either CCTS 3.0 and 2.01) will also become community specifications – They are libraries used by specific communities to support legacy implementations – Should be based on CIFL – Would be published in UN/CEFACT registry Each governance community approves its own specifications – Can claim self conformance to UN/CEFACT foundational library – Similar to industry groups within ISO 20022 project or CEN CWAs 30

31. summary (proposed) Revised Technical Framework: Standardize on semantics not syntax or formats UN/CEFACT ‘core’ semantics establish foundation for interoperability Communities of use create their own implementations Process, components, structures, documents and syntax Statement of conformance Registry of conformant specifications published by UN/CEFACT UN/CEFACT is a facilitator of interoperability between communities eProcurement impact: UN/CEFACT projects will develop… Profiles for eProcurement processes Business requirements, rules and semantics Published as Deliverables for Information Recommendation for use of standards European eInvoicing community (e.g. CEN/BII) develops … European core Invoice Data Model European business requirements, rules and semantics 31