|
[EDI-L Mailing List Archive Home]
[Message List]
[Reply To This Message]
RE: Don't gamble with your choice of standards
Not to belabor the point which I'm pretty sure has been discussed before,
but I must take issue (albeit small and technical) with respect to the
remark in the article: "...there are multiple versions of XML."
Well, not exactly. The point is that XML, in and of itself, has nothing to
do with business data organization. XML is basically a syntax definition,
not entirely unlike ISO 9735 or X12's syntax. It talks about how data can
be structured, and what the mechanics are. But it doesn't talk directly to
the idea of standard business documents. To say that CIDX and PIDX are
versions of *XML* is an oversimplification. They all use the same syntax
(ie. XML). What they do differently is provide different data tag sets or
data dictionaries. In fact, that's the biggest potential problem with the
world of XML-based standards: as the joke goes, there are so many to choose
from (and more in the pipeline, to be sure).
Having said that, I would then have to give equal time to the existance of
two versions of the XML syntax: versions 1.0 and 1.1. The newer 1.1 version
adds some support extensions to the original 1.0 to allow for the continuing
enhancement of the UNICODE character set and some new constraint rules for
"normalization". This kind of enhancement can be likened to the extensions
made to ISO 9735 when they moved to version 4. A few features were added,
but the overall flavor remained the same. And in either case, the question
of data dictionaries and business data organization remain outside their
respective purviews.
Best regards,
Bill Chessman
Inovis(tm), Inc.
-----Original Message-----
From: David Frenkel [mailto:
Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2004 10:04 PM
To:
Subject: RE: [EDI-L] Don't gamble with your choice of standards
E-BUSINESS STANDARDS
Don't gamble with your choice of standards
Sooner or later, virtually every company will find itself engaged in some
form of e-commerce, and doing so will require adherence to one or more
standards for passing data between business partners.
Many vendors-including suppliers of ERP, supply chain management, and other
applications typically used by manufacturers and distributors-claim that
documents or data generated in their applications already conform to
e-business standards.
While most of those claims are true, users still must ensure their
applications conform to the right standards for their particular business.
Failure to confirm the appropriateness of a given e-business standard
amounts to a major gamble that could take a considerable amount of time and
money to recover from. It also could conceivably lead to the loss of
customers.
"Companies are in effect playing what amounts to standards roulette," says
Frank Lin, director of professional services for Drake Certivo, a Newport
Beach, Calif.-based consulting firm that specializes in helping companies
resolve e-business issues.
Selecting the proper standards has become a gamble partly because of the
widespread belief that XML, or eXtensible markup language, is the primary
standard for e-business communication. XML is, indeed, the most widely used
e-business standard, but there are multiple versions of XML.
In general, the different versions of XML have been created by and for
groups of companies in a particular industry. For instance, the RosettaNet
standard is a form of XML used primarily by high-tech manufacturers. The
chemical and petroleum industries have their own versions of XML, known as
CIDX and PIDX, respectively. Even the human resources field has a version of
the standard known as HRXML.
Lin says all this makes it important for companies to have a strategy for
screening applications for their adherence to the proper standards. The
strategy should include identifying the business reasons for moving to an
e-business model and letting those reasons, not technology, drive the choice
of both applications and standards.
At the same time, any specifications embedded in an application should, at
the very least, conform to standards for your industry.
Lin also advises small and medium-size companies to learn what standards
their larger customers, also known as the supply chain gorillas, are using.
"In most cases," he says, "the gorillas are going to make the rules."
There is some good news for companies that may be confused by all this, Lin
adds. For instance, recent mergers by standards bodies such as RosettaNet
and the Uniform Code Council indicate that standards are beginning to
converge, which could make the selection process easier for users.
David Frenkel
612-237-1966
-----Original Message-----
From: Prakash G (MICO/CLP52) * [mailto:
Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2004 11:17 PM
To: David Frenkel;
Subject: RE: [EDI-L] Don't gamble with your choice of standards
I could not see the information instead following error page was
displayed...
"We could not find your registration information on file!"
-Prakash
-----Original Message-----
From: David Frenkel [mailto:
Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 2004 9:48 AM
To:
Subject: [EDI-L] Don't gamble with your choice of standards
http://www.msimag.com/current_issues/2004/feb/it7.asp
Regards,
David Frenkel
612-237-1966
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
.
Please use the following Message Identifiers as your subject prefix:
<SALES>, <JOBS>, <LIST>, <TECH>, <MISC>, <EVENT>, <OFF-TOPIC>
Access the list online at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EDI-L
Yahoo! Groups Links
.
Please use the following Message Identifiers as your subject prefix:
<SALES>, <JOBS>, <LIST>, <TECH>, <MISC>, <EVENT>, <OFF-TOPIC>
Access the list online at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EDI-L
Yahoo! Groups Links
.
Please use the following Message Identifiers as your subject prefix:
<SALES>, <JOBS>, <LIST>, <TECH>, <MISC>, <EVENT>, <OFF-TOPIC>
Access the list online at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EDI-L
Yahoo! Groups Links
|
 |
Subscribe in XML format
| RSS 2.0 |
|
| Atom 0.3 |
|
|
Cart
