Re: ERP Standards

[Derek A. Neighbors]

Chris,

> XBRL is all about _reporting_ standards.  It doesn't say what fields
> there ought to be in particular accounting transactions; it instead
> speaks to how the summary report at the end of the year should get
> reported.  
I am glad you pointed this out, because thats what I ORIGINALLY thought, 
but based on the emails I thought they had a 'general ledger' 
specification now, I guess I shouldnt assume things. :)

> There's certainly some merit in having some code and tables that could
> be used to do that "walk."
The nature of GNUe architecture (which is very XML fluid) shall have no 
problem with this.

> What COULD, CONCEIVABLY, be of some value in influencing GnuE
> direction would be stuff along the lines of successor schemes to EDI,
> allowing quasi-standardized ways of exchanging data with business
> partners.
I think even EDI specifications for data transfers will be similar as we 
will have an EAI tool or even our reporting tool for that matter than 
can adapt to virtually ANY XML format.  The only issue woudl be if GNUe 
(the ERP) not the tools didnt have the proper fields necessary for the 
specification.  However, I think your point is still very valid.

> For instance:
>
> - It would be nice to pull in transaction data from banks, and
>   get as many ID links hooked in as possible to your own data so as
>   to know what transactions have gone through the bank.  
Cool concept.

>   For instance, if you've got 4875 cheques going through each month,
>   getting 4853 of them automagically matched against what you issued
>   and thus marked as "cleared" so that there are only a couple dozen
>   to look at manually is a BIG savings of effort.
>
> - It sure would be nice if you could take purchase orders sent to you
>   by email by customers and automagically transform these into
>   "draft" sales orders.
>
>   Similar is true for other documents that get sent back and forth.
>   If an incoming electronic form can get transformed automagically to
>   generate whatever document you generate as a response to it, that
>   would sure be useful.
>
> None of the standards mentioned are much more than elliptically
> related to these sorts of "EDI" functionality.
I have meant to revisit XML-EDI and OFX but havent for some time.  The 
problem with EDI is VAN and VAN charges its like a 'surcharge' to do 
business.  Some day hopefully we will be able to lift the 'levy'.

As always thank for the insights.  Havent heard your voice for a bit, 
thought perhaps you had given up on us. :)O

-Derek