ubl-dev message
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]
Subject: Re: [ubl-dev] UBL and ISO 20022 mapping
- From: "Roberto Cisternino" <roberto@javest.com>
- To: "Marcel Trawny" <ubl@xuzz.com>
- Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2012 17:14:34 +0200 (CEST)
Hello Marcel,
for an ontology that is mapping UBL with other
standards you could review the OASIS SET TC and their deliverables.
UBL 2.0 and CII 2.0 can be mapped through the CCTS semantic
annotations available into their XSDs, but I have nothing ready for
this.
There have been several attempts to make a gap analysis or map
between these formats but a real and precise XPATH map is not available I
think.
ISO 20022 : eFinance = UBL : eBusiness
The
upcoming UBL 2.1 can be used together ISO 20022 for end-to-end Financial
Supply Chain applications in a complementary way, but they are different
kernels.
The young ISO20022 invoice is a banking thing thousand
miles from real invoice needs around the globe.
Semantically
ISO20022 and UBL are very different as they come from different
repositories. UBL is an excellent ISO15000-5 (CCTS) implementation
and its bricks are harmonized and persisted in the UN/CCL library.
The "CII" Invoice is a different assembly of the UN/CCL
semantic bricks, but I think UBL has a better structure. (two
different walls made up several common bricks).
CII is more a
semantic work used to fit the European requirements but it can be
implemented using any other CCTS-based language like UBL, GS1, CDX, PDX,
...
It could be more hard to map other proprietary formats, EDIFACT,
so on...
UBL 2.0 Invoice is compatible with the core CII set
requested by EU.
I would suggest to keep your eyes on the
European e-procurement project named "PEPPOL", that is an
implementation of the CEN WS/BII Abstract model for e-procurement using
the UBL 2.0 syntax.
PEPPOL implements the core invoice model
described by CEN-BII.
You will note these days that the shift
is provided by using mature XML languages for business like UBL, that can
be easely customized (reduced) and profiled to fit several industry
needs.
I would like to present you an analogy with the past:
Standard Syntax |
Standard Abstract Profiles |
User Group Implementations |
UN/EDIFACT
|
none |
EANCOM, SMDG, ITIGG, ... |
UBL |
CEN/WS BII |
PEPPOL |
CII |
CII |
??? |
ISO-20022 |
none |
EPC, CGI |
As you note both CEN-BII and CII are abstract models that are
implemented through user groups.
Hope this is of any help.
Roberto Cisternino, JAVEST
> Hi,
>
> i am writing my diploma thesis about transformation (XSD
and ontology)
> of invoice documents, especially UBL and IS0
20022. Unfortunately, my
> domain knowledge about the invoice
domain is insufficiently. Have
> anybody a mapping for the both
standards for me or perhaps a mapping for
> UBL and CII V2.0?
>
> I am eternally in your debt.
>
> Many
thanks.
>
> Best regards,
> Marcel
>
**
>
--
* JAVEST by Roberto Cisternino
*
* Document Engineering Services Ltd. - Alliance Member
* UBL
Italian Localization SubCommittee (ITLSC), co-Chair
* UBL Online
Community editorial board member (ubl.xml.org)
* Italian UBL
Advisor
Roberto Cisternino
mobile: +39 328
2148123
skype: roberto.cisternino.ubl-itlsc
[UBL
Technical Committee]
http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/ubl
[UBL Online Community]
http://ubl.xml.org
[UBL
International Conferences]
http://www.ublconference.org
[UBL Italian Localization Subcommittee]
http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/ubl-itlsc
[Iniziativa
divulgativa UBL Italia]
http://www.ubl-italia.org
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]