B2B integration standards - Aalto · (c) Paavo Kotinurmi 2001-2004 18/11/2004 SoberIT Software...

SoberITSoftware Business and Engineering Institute

HELSINKI UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY

B2B Standards and supply chain integration

Paavo Kotinurmi

18/11/2004(c) Paavo Kotinurmi 2001-2004



Question

What we need do agree on in order to be able to exchange the following conversation electronically?

Buyer: “I would like to order 200 bottles of soda to my store? I expect delivery on Wednesday at 10 o’clock”

Seller: “Ok. It’ll cost you 200. I expect payment at the delivery day.”




Contents

1st part

Introduction to B2B integration and motivation for standards

Electronic Data Interchange (EDI) and XML Based e-business

frameworks

Relationship to the “ICTEC big pictures”

2nd part.

RosettaNet

ebXML

Other relevant standards for supply chain integration




Motivation for standards

Data transfer needs high, volume high, probability of human errors high,

frequency of data transfer Integration is needed between systemsXML has been central element in recent B2B standardization but XML alone is not enoughAlthough following are all human readable/interpretable, computers have problems in these things

<e-business/> <date>15.11.2004</date><eBusiness/> <date>15th November 2004</date><E-business/> <xs:date>2004-11-15</xs:date>

XML provides a syntax way to represent information

Need standard to define commonly understood business documents

B2B standards often don’t just standardize the business documents, but define also the inter-company business processes and how the business documents can be securely transported over the Internet




B2B e-business classificationsB2B H2H – Human to Human

Pick up the phone, order, replenish etc. FaxOther ‘human’ communication means

B2B H2S – Human to SystemGo to your suppliers website and tab in your order.Access directly into your partners systems from your desktop

B2B S2S – System to System‘Intelligent’ links between partners. ERP (or other systems and applications) are linked to ERP.E.g. by using RosettaNetEDI (electronic data interchange) falls also in this classification




Manual business process

Postal service

Company A

Company B




Automatic process

Business Document is standardized message encoded using XML or EDI

Reliable messaging =“postal service”




Contents

1st part


Electronic Data Interchange (EDI) and XML Based e-

business frameworks


2nd part.

RosettaNet

ebXML

Other relevant standards




EDI background

The creators of EDI were mainly concerned about the

size of their messages.

EDI messages are very compressed and use codes to

represent complex values.

The metadata is stripped from an EDI message

makes the message difficult to read and debug.

EDI programmers are hard to train and expensive to

keep. This complexity drives cost.




EDI (EDIFACT order)UNH+0002771776+ORDERS:D:99A:UN:FI0084’BGM+105+40063000277177602748497+9’DTM+4:20000705:102’DTM+2:20000706:102’DTM+9:20000705:102’NAD+BY+003709895955:100++TRADEKA OY’NAD+SE+003702134547:100++OY HARTWALL AB’NAD+CN+40063000::92++VALINTATALOHERVANTA+LINDFORSINKATU 2+TAMPERE++33720’LIN+1++6413600001584:EN’IMD+F+8+:::HTW NOVELLE ORANGE LIME 1,5 L’QTY+21:144’LIN+2++6413600000280:EN’IMD+F+8+-:::VICHY 0,33L/HARTWALL’QTY+21:430’UNS+S’CNT+2:2’UNT+17+0002771776'

Source: TIEKE (EDI standards Finnish implementation guidelines document)




EDI explained

EDI is a set of message formats that act as templates for

purchase orders, invoices, payments, shipping manifests,

and the like.

They allow data to be moved around between companies

while ensuring that it can be automatically read by all.

EDI has nothing to say about how individual applications

are built, only that they should export data in a particular

format, and that they can expect to receive data in a

particular format.




EDI and XML

EDI was never

adopted very widely

(Hasselbring et al.)

"Few enterprises establish

EDI connections with more

than 15 to 20 percent of

their trading communities.“

- Gartner Group




XML-based E-business framework

Incompatible business documents, heterogeneous information systems

Setting up electronic Business-to-Business relationships is time-

consuming and costly.

What information share, when to share information, and how to share

information? eased to a certain extent by standards such as RosettaNet

Compared to older EDI standards, the modern XML-based e-business

frameworks are meant for more flexible and complicated integration

needs than those of EDI.

e.g. forecasting processes, financials, product data sharing

Not just buying in-prior defined products on previously agreed prices,

but also more complex negotiations.




XML and EDI together

Converter

Internet

VAN

ERP

Large company

Medium sized company

Small company

ERP

ERP

Con-verter

Con-verter

EDI server

XML server

EDI server

XML server




XML vs. EDI example

<po1><ass.Id>1</ass.id><Q.Ordered>54</Q.Ordered><Unit.M>EA</Unit.M><Unit.P>0.99</Unit.P><Price.C>CA</Price.C> <Prod.ID.C>VN</Prod.ID.C><Prod.ID>456</Prod.ID>

</po1>Source: Drummond and Spearman, 1999.




Contents

1st part



frameworks


2nd part.

RosettaNet

ebXML





Soininen 1.11.2004




Where do standards fit in?

Jari Talvinen, 1.11.2004




An Electronic Commerce Framework by Kalakota




Alter’s ”work system” framework

CO

NTEX

T

INFRASTRUCTURE

STR

ATE

GY

The work system method:

is a broadly applicable set of ideas

that use the concept of “work

system” as the focal point for

understanding, analyzing and

improving systems in organizations,

whether or not IT is involved. (Alter)




Contents

1st part



frameworks


2nd part.

RosettaNet and ebXML

Example business need and solutions offered





RosettaNet

Standardizes inter-company “public” processes (PIPs)

The related messages (DTD + Message guidelines) =

Business documents

Standard messaging framework (RNIF).

Defines dictionaries (RNTD and RNBD) and codes (GTIN

and DUNS)

Trading partner agreement (TPA)

RN technical dictionary only really industry specific part




RosettaNet messaging principle

Internet & XML

RosettaNet defines processes and a framework for how data gets passed over the Web and certain handshake criteria.

Company A

SAPERP

Company Specific processing

I2APS

Company BCompany Specific

processing

Translate from RosettaNet standards to Company A system data set.

Translate from RosettaNet standards to Company Bsystem data set.

source: RosettaNet




RosettaNet Partner Interface Process (PIP)

Encapsulate business processes

Specify structure and format of business document

payloads

Specify activities, decisions, and roles for each trading

partner involved in a particular business activity

Distributed as downloadable .zip file from rosettanet.org

(Specification document, DTD(s) and message

guideline(s))




Order processing in generic company

QPR ProcessGuide for Rosettanet




New PIP composition effort

Companieswilling to pay

PIP xYz

Codes and classifications

Technical Dictionary

GTIN DUNSUN/SPSC

Business Dictionary

RosettaNetexperts

Business issues

Technical issues




Implementation – Trading Partner Agreement

CompanyA

CompanyB

TPA concerningPIP xYz

Technical issues

IP, Ports, firewalls

RNIF version used

Encryption, certificates

Schema compatibility

Business issues

What, when, how

Roles

Conditions (contracts, authorization)

Exceptional biz situation




Run-time collaboration

Company BCompany A

Gatewayserver

GatewayserverEAI

ERP

PDM

xyz

ERP

PDM

yxz

PIP in RNIFEnvelope

over InternetPIP

PIPCore

Data

extracted

PIP PIPData

extracted




Summary: Problem that RosettaNet tries to solve

Standards needed to enable system-to-system B2B

collaboration.

Helps solving some semantical problems in specific

industry by providing message guidelines, dictionaries and

unique identifiers

Defines standard business processes

Reliable messaging over Internet




RosettaNet challenges

The specifications are being improved, which means they

are changing (e.g. use of XML Schema instead of DTD and

MG)

Some aspects of the specifications are ambiguous.

The readability of the existing documentation needs to be

improved.

The enterprise readiness effort for RosettaNet

implementations is often underestimated.

Possible convergence with other standardssource: RosettaNet




ebXML

http://www.ebxml.org/

Originally 18 months project sponsored by UN/CEFACT ja OASIS.

enables enterprises of any size and in any geographical location

to conduct business over the Internet.

Defines modular specifications: messaging (ebXML MSG),

describing inter-company processes (ebXML BPSS), collaboration

protocol profiles and agreements (ebXML CPPA), the use of

registries (ebXML RS/RIM) and define core components as

semantic building blocks for business documents (ebXML CC)

http://www.ebxml.org/




ebXML collaboration

Source: ebXML specifications




Source: ebXML specifications




Contents

1st part



frameworks


2nd part.







Example need

Two partners need to share forecasting information to avoid so

called Bullwhip/Forrester effect

There is a lot of this information needed to be quite frequently

exchanged




How RosettaNet and ebXML help in this example need

RosettaNetForecasting segment PIPs, “PIP 4A1: Notify of Strategic Forecast”, “PIP 4A3: Notify of Threshold Release Forecast” and “PIP 4A5: Notify of Forecast Reply”define the inter-company processes and business documents

RNIF defines how business documents are securely transported

There are product in the market with RosettaNet support

ebXML

ebXML Core components can form the basis but there are no ready standards schemas ready, but they need to be defined

ebXML BPSS process description language can be used to represent the process in XML, but again these needs to be defined first..

ebXML MSG defines how business documents are securely transported and there are supporting products available

This scenario did not involve automatic partner search or contracting which would have been supported by ebXML




RosettaNet and ebXML competition?

In 2001 RosettaNet promised to support ebXML MSG in the next

RNIF-versions. So far there are no new versions.. At this point

RNIF and ebXML MSG are competing solutions.

PIP process descriptions will be made using ebXML BPSS – The

first PIP drafts using are published (8/2004)

RosettaNet has not used ebXML CC but uses its own dictionaries

These two e-business frameworks mostly complement each other




Contents

1st part



frameworks


2nd part.







Other XML-based e-business standards

OAG defines ”Business Object Documents (BOD)” definition for use in integration. OAG Integration Specification (OAGIS) guides, how BODscan ne used also with other e-business frameworks such as RosettaNet or ebXML

XML Common Business Library (xCBL) defines standard business documents. CommerceOne market-place vendor a driving force.

Commerce XML (cXML) resembles xCBL. It too defines standard business documents. Differ from xCBL both in technically and in content-wise. Ariba market-place vendor a driving force.

Universal Business Language (UBL) creates based on ebXML CC and xCBL a universal business documents

…This is just a sample of tens of business document standards, many are industry specific.




Web Services

Web Services (WS) development creates a group of standards for

application integration. The most important are SOAP for messaging,

Web Services Description Language (WSDL) ja UDDI registries

Also process description languages are defines, such as ”Business

Process Execution Language for WS (BPEL)”

WS specifications are application level standards. They do not define e.g.

business document definitions or standard inter-company processes – i.e

they do not standardise what actually is integrated.

There for WS standards are not competing with RosettaNet or ebXML.




Comparison table of e-business frameworks

Standard/feature

RosettaNet ebXML OAGIS Web Services

EDI

Process in XML

-- BPSS -- BPEL

B2B Process

PIP (BPSS) (scenarios)

TPA Manually CPPA -- -- Manually

Registry -- RS/RIM -- UDDI

Document semantics

Message guide-lines, dictionaries

Core Components

Core Component

-- Transaction set guidelines

Business document

PIP DTD (Soon XSD)

** UBL XSDcould be here **

BOD XSD -- EDIFACT, ANSI X.12, ODETTE,..

Messaging RNIF 1.1,2.0 MSG 1.0,2.0 (SOAP)

RNIF 2.0 SOAP, WSDL

(VAN, internet EDI)

Defines the standard Defines how to use this standard () Provides just guidelines




Conclusions

There are many XML-based standards for supply chain

integration – most of them are still mostly un-proven (little

usage experiences).

Different standards do not all compete or complement others in

all the issues

mainly compete in message semantics issues: almost all define

standard messages to be used

Same two standards can complement on some issues, while

competing in other issues

Which one to choose as a basis?

The only thing that is sure is change




<end_note>Any Questions?

</end_note>




Possible extra slides




What is wrong with the following ?

“Each standard is contained in an XML Document Type Definition

(DTD), usually just called a dictionary. For example, RosettaNet is

an XML dictionary developed by 34 leading companies within PC

industry. It defines all properties of a personal computer, such as

modems, monitors, and cache memory. As a result the entire PC

industry is now able to speak the same language. The entire

supply chain of the industry can now easily be linked without

requiring business partners or customers to to use a particular

programming language, application,or a operating system to

exchange data”. (source: Laudon & Laudon, Management

Information Systems, 2002 on RosettaNet standard and XML.)

B2B integration standards - Aalto · (c) Paavo Kotinurmi 2001-2004 18/11/2004 SoberIT Software...

Documents

Transcript of B2B integration standards - Aalto · (c) Paavo Kotinurmi 2001-2004 18/11/2004 SoberIT Software...