Can we get a URL for the OECD document, please?
Alex
"H.J.M. van Burg" wrote:
> Andy (and others: thanks),
>
> I agree with you about the urgency of the OECD "standard". There is also the
> work that has been done by the EU with regards to the schema they produced
> on e-commerce. Your colleagues from Customs and excise are involved in that.
> I do not know if Arnd is "listening" otherwise you and I could make the
> contact.
> An other urgent subject is the UBL document which is open for review. I read
> it, there is Tax in it but I do not know if there are chances here?
> Is it possible that some of the other members take a look so that we might
> coordinate a comment?
>
> Harm Jan
>
> -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
> Van: Andy Greener [mailto:]
> Verzonden: dinsdag 25 februari 2003 16:12
> Aan:
> Onderwerp: Re: [tax] Sub-committees
>
> I'm also happy to go along with Harm-Jan's suggestion.
>
> If you're listening Michael, and in case there's any doubt, I'd like
> to participate in the technical SC.
>
> >I agree with Harm's approach. If we start with the sub-committees we
> >know for sure that we need, we can always add as needed. To begin with,
> >we can have the technical sub-committee look at the OECD work
>
> I think this is a relatively urgent short-term goal - there is a Schema
> already in existence for STF (the OECD "standard" transfer format) as
> proposed by Arndt, and we should be examining this to see how it might fit
> with existing standards such as UBL and ebXML Core Components.
>
> > Glenda's
> >suggestion, and other technical items. We can have the business
> >sub-committee look at business processes and liaisons. As we get further
> >along and produce some deliverables per our charter, we will be in a
> >much better position to revisit the sub-committee makeup and decide.
> >
> >"H.J.M. van Burg" wrote:
> >>
> >> Andy, John,
> >>
> >> As we look at the present list of participants in de TC, I do not know if
> we
> >> have the luxury situation to have three subgroups yet. I think we could
> do
> >> with two for the moment where one has a more technical scope and the
> other
> >> one a more business approach.
> >> Liaison with other bodies can take place on ad hoc basis, but most tiems,
> I
> >> presume it will be technical.
> >> I am fine with the descriptions produced so far but I would suggest that
> we
> >> try to start of with two groups. In my mind that was also the opinion
> >> during the teleconference.
> >> Of course we could do it otherwise.
> >> Any suggestions?
> >>
> > > Harm-Jan
>
> --
>
> Andy Greener Mob: +44 7836 331933
> GID Ltd, Reading, UK Tel: +44 118 956 1248
> Fax: +44 118 958 9005
--
PK
