Message-Id: <33F368E3@campgate.camp.org> Encoding: 535 TEXT


Here is a copy of the EC user group minutes that mentions your URL. This went out to about 66 groups across the US and finds its way into several international camps too.

Gary

PS I am still looking for that test file stuff.
August 13th CALS/Electronic Commerce Users Group Conference call minutes

Background
The monthly conference call invites every CALS or Electronic Commerce Users Group to share experiences and information with the objective of improving national coordination and focus. This summary is produced and disseminated widely.

Summary
This month s call focused on Business Process Reengineering and Electronic Commerce. Parallels were noted between activities in the healthcare industry and the manufacturing sector. Discussion on challenges to EC focused on core issues and needs, which are summarized below. These will be taken into the joint Industry / Government meeting next week. Several examples of success were noted including, use of groupware, sharing of educational material, and management of suppliers. There were also several incidents where groups were able to provide direct help to each other by recommending speakers and giving updates on specific standards.

Highlights
* We all could be helped by progress in a number of core areas. These include,
** Education - standardized courses and senior management training would both be good areas of concentration.
** Protocols - In other sectors decisions on X12 or EDIFACT are being made inconsistent with others experience. The benefits of consistent protocols and procedures among different sectors include greatly accelerating adoption and software development. Selective standardization of  EC infrastructure components such as EDI formats is a good example of  influence and recommendations that we can collectively pursue.
** On Line Access to Data
This takes many forms but the Contractor Integrated Technical Information System (CITIS) is one of the most successful forms. This area is expanding and special emphasis needs to be placed on the definition of data elements via military and commercial standards like Mil 2549 and ISO 10303.

* Survey results
Please query your groups and individual companies on where they are on the EC continuum (see attachment A). Send results to me and, in mid October we will publish only the national averages. Note that this survey is also being sent to companies that have never participated in users groups. I would like to be able to compare the results to help determine if participation in User Groups is advantageous (hint, hint). Get results to me by October 1st. If you are interested I can also supply regional averages for your particular group.
 * National EC Presentation Repository (NECPR) The procedures and design of  NECPR is included as Attachment B. Please look this over and get your comments back to me at gary.conkol@camp.org. Also, locate one set of minutes or presentation that you can share with the other groups. E-mail those to me and this will help test the site. We should be able to allow downloads by the end of September but only if your group is also a contributor.

* Healthcare Oriented Groups
This area is primarily focused on the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act and EDI transmission of insurance related data at this point. Patient record data, akin to manufactured product data, will also be an interest area in EC. A separate conference call may be established for the healthcare focus area.

* Challenges to EC (Please Add Yours and Get Back To Me !!!) We keep a running list of challenges, barriers, and obstacles to EC as a hit list for action. That list currents includes, ** Network Security
** Proliferation of poorly designed and performing systems and procedures ** Lack of long range planning
** Costs, especially for small companies ** Education
** Consistent and/or compatible procedures ** Interoperable systems and software
** Senior Management Support / lack of
** Generation and computer literacy Gap

* Other
** For those of you interested in IGES and CAD/CAM data exchange there is a new home page on the WWW. Check out   http://www.iges5x.org by the IGES Preservation Society.

Attachments
***********
A) Survey on EC implementation
B) National EC Presentation Repository Procedures C) RIG / UG Call roster
 Next Conference Calls - Dates and Topics **********************************
September 24 - Presentation Repository test run ??? Presentation to be given on the call corresponding to one in the repository.

October 15 - CALS Expo topics (possible joint call from the floor of the Expo in Orlando)

November 12 - open

December 17 - open
********************
Next RIG / UG Meetings
********************
August 19 - Cleveland, Ohio - Leo Klein September 11 - Dallas, TX - Collaborative Virtual Prototyping - Marian Hiler September 16 - Cleveland, Ohio - EDIFACT - Leo Klein September - Palestine, TX - State of Texas EC Initiatives - Burton Anderson October - Indianapolis, Indiana - Intranets - Linda Perdue November 14 - Denver EDI Roundtable - CALS VE Capability Model - Ron Schuldt

**********************************
Individual Area Updates
**********************************
Alabama, Huntsville - Jim Neiers
Configuration and data management were the two elements that surfaced out of a groupware facilitated meeting that this group held. They also looked at ways to evaluate contract readiness by the supplier base in terms of CALS capabilities. The results of their discussions are to be put on their web page. This meeting served an educational role for the group on the use of electronic conferencing. They were able to brainstorm and reach conclusions in a very short period of time as opposed to an all day session. This is a way to make user group meetings more productive and be an advantage to draw attendance. Some discussion on Mil Std 2549  versus STEP 203 was also prompted. The strength of the 2549 standard is in the life cycle support of a product including engineering changes.

Colorado, Denver - Ron Schuldt
This group works closely with Colorado Springs on the subject of CALS and SGML. There is due to interest in technical publications in the area. 
Recently, they have observed renewed interest and focus on CALS in the government sector as an integration and life cycle support framework. This includes a major joint Industry / Government closed door meeting next week. 
CALS has also been the subject of memorandums at the Secretary of Defense and Presidential levels. This governmental focus on accelerating EC is sure to have an effect on the commercial sector as well. It was also noted that the small companies have to see benefit in EC to participate. As such the small company oriented group in Colorado Springs has noticed a decrease in participation.

Minnesota, St. Paul - Patrice Thaler
The major driving document that has convinced healthcare organizations to get into EC is the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (August 1996). As EC is implemented this sector is running into the same challenges as manufacturing, especially in small businesses and clinics. The large companies are on line but the small providers are having a difficult time. It is felt that education is a large part of this. The Department of Health and Human Services is considering an educational program to help this. Patrice testified in hearings on that subject and cited the ECRCs as a successful DoD educational program that has helped implement EC and recommended not to  re-invent the wheel .

Missouri, St. Louis - Dave Uterback, Laurie Pererfreund They are working on a roadmap for establishing and sustaining this new group. Their next meeting will be in early October on Collaborative Technologies. This includes Interactive Electronic Technical Manuals assembled via the WWW. Another area that has been successful is the placement of Buy-To packages for manufacturing tooling on a secure server. 
Potential bidders are notified via e-mail and given 24 hours to bid. This replaces bidders conferences. Great benefits in time, cost, and quality have been experienced. In addition, bidders have access to the information needed to make a more accurate and reliable bid thereby increasing overall quality and trimming price.

Oklahoma, Ardmore - Roger Graves (offline) Roger made a very good point as he compared the old Commerce Business Daily publication to the current mix of CD-ROMS, BBs, WWW pages, VANs, and dispairent procedures. Today s small company has to spend more time and cost to get lower quality information from a variety of sources. Left unchanged, this proliferation will cause the government to lose its small supplier base in favor of a few large OEMs with the resources to handle the different formats. This will cause the problem of interoperability to migrate down to lower tiers and the cost will be borne by the OEMs with resultant increase in cost to the government. A close parallel can be noted in the Automotive industry.

Texas, Central -  Central Texas EDI Users Group - Burton Anderson This group has arranged their next years worth of meetings and topics. 
Topics include, EC initiatives of the State of Texas, tax filing, telecommunications, year 2000 problem, digital signatures and the law. One of their local presentations was by TI who changed their process with suppliers and took the response time form weeks down to hours. This type of dramatic benefit is what is needed to prompt BPR as opposed to passing interest.

Texas, Dallas - CALS Connectivity Center - Marian Hiler It was noted that participation in the group is heavily dependent on the attendees orientation such as aerospace, reliability, or other. CALS is still a viable concept and program but people need to see how it can help them.
 Texas, Palestine - Bob Platt, Walter Tate There is a lot on interest in the purchasing agents and contractors in using EC to assist them via the Internet. The main benefit sought is that of time response. It makes sense to separate EC into 2 parts. The first part is to have the vendor catalogs on line so that the purchasing people can access them. The second part is the translation of a bid by the supplier into the transaction set required.

Washington, Pacific Northwest Group - Ray Newell, Ron Gillis, George Bieda They noted that EDI is very strong at large companies but is still lacking at small companies. This is mostly due to the cost and lack of significant positive impact for the business. They also observed multiple systems and procedures proliferating with many of them with poor performance. This is a major issue in trying to move EC ahead. Convergence of protocols, standards, and procedures needs to be facilitated. Also, they just finished their annual meeting with the Washington Aerospace Alliance which drew people internationally.
 ************
Attachment A - National Survey on EC Implementation ************
Survey on Where you are relative to EC implementation  DRAFT 5/22/97

Forward
The following questions are designed to allow a company or operation to rate itself against a national average in the implementation and use of a series of technologies collectively called Electronic Commerce. By completing the questionnaire and sending in the results you will help us determine the national state of the art and readiness to use these technologies, what is left to be done, and the overall state of awareness. We will publish the results showing the national and regional averages which will allow you to see where your self ratings compare to the national average.

This survey is being done through the CALS Industry Steering Group and in cooperation with the national Electronic Commerce Resource Centers and a national coalition of independent regional interest and users groups. 
Similar surveys have been done in the past but this is the first coordinated through such a large body of independent groups. In this way you are surveyed once and the results applied broadly. Your answers are important to us, so the entire survey process is designed to benefit your company through helping us determine national needs. Please indicate your depth of exposure in each of the following areas (1- concept understood or demonstrated, 2-pilot in progress, 3-implementation limited to 20-50% of enterprise, 4-more than 50% of enterprise affected),

Capability /Examples
*****************
Electronic Data Exchange (E-mail, EDI, Network based Bulletin Boards)

Integration of EDI and Internal Applications (Communication between MRP, ERP, CAD/CAM, EDI, Financial Systems, ...)

Technical Data Exchange (Use of data standards to exchange data such as SGML, IGES, 841, STEP, DXF, ...)

Product / Process Data  Driven Manufacturing (Use of STEP in Manufacturing, Manufacturing Execution Systems, MRP, N/C,..)

Distributed Collaborative Engineering (Whiteboarding over external networks, Virtual Prototyping over networks, Integrated Process Team support, CITIS,...)

Network Based Outsourcing (Electronic Bidding, use of VANS, Bi-directional Home Pages on the WWW)

Virtual Enterprises (International Alliances, Simultaneous Scheduling at multiple locations, Dynamic Partnering, Electronically managed supplier chains,...)
 ********************************************* Attachment B - Draft NECPR Procedures
********************************************* Presentation Repository Form and Procedures New listing 5/16/97 GKC
Update 8/13/97

DRAFT

NOTE to developers : As you review this, develop an opinion on the following matters and add your own issues to this list [] how do we get electronic signatures or equivalent on the forms ?
[] should we make this available only to the chair of each group or open it up to any individual ?
[] Are the suggested keywords and categories useful ?

 --------- start of document ------------- A) Forward
This document contains the procedures and forms associated with the National EC Presentation Repository (NECPR).The forms include those for incoming and outgoing presentations.

These procedures are based on the following premises, 1) the purpose of NECPR is the open sharing of information 2) two components of support include, a) the project manager who handles judgmental procedures and b) the secretariat which hosts the repository and performs maintenance functions
3) The author of the presentation is to be given acknowledgment for their contribution
4) The NECPR is intended to contain a) presentation files in PPT or PDF formats, b) text files containing minutes, position papers, reference notes, tables,...
5) ?? in order to download a file, the group the person is associated with must have provided at least one presentation within the last year 6) presentations will have a finite life and be purged after 1 year (is this the right length of time? )
7) ???

B) General Design
The repository consists of  a development system where the files are first loaded and checked and a distribution system that is made accessible to the Internet for e-mail and FTP downloading. Work associated with NECPR consists of a project manager who addresses judgmental issues and the secretariat who handles computer and network maintenance.

D) Repository Procedures
I. Origin of  Presentations
 The following are intended origins of presentations 1. from speakers bureau
2. from a target list of topics for which presentations are sought 3. from CALS Expo
4. from regional groups
5. from nationally known speakers, agencies, ECRCs...

II. Submitting a presentation to NECPR
A. the submitter makes sure that the presentation is public domain and releasable
B. Download the sample title sheet from NECPR C. Change the information on the title sheet and slide master (if a presentation)
D. Make title sheet the first page of file E. e-mail to the NECPR Program Manager with the file attached

III. Loading a presentation into the Repository A. Once a presentation is received, it is logged in by recording the event in the receiving database
B. The file is checked for incoming viruses.
C. The file is loaded onto the development system in a private area D. The presentation is checked to verify that the description is accurate 1. if any information is missing on the submittal form, it is generated by the project manager at this point if possible E. A footnote is added to the master slide view (Powerpoint). The example footnote is attached. See attachment A. PDF files do not get the footnote added.
F. A front page is added to any Powerpoint or graphic file with the presentation information. See attachment A for the format and sample. If the submitted file is a PDF, a new PPT file by the same name is generated containing only the front page.
G. The file is transferred to the NECPR Secretariat who loads it on the distribution system
H. The distribution database is updated with the information for the new presentation

I. Checklist for release to distribution system 1.  [] input form on file
2.  [] files scanned for viruses
3.  [] presentation visually reviewed
4.  [] categories established
5.  [] database updated
6.  [] ???
J. ???

IV. Requesting and Receiving a Presentation A. The recipient reviews the listing of the Repository by, 1. looking up the WWW homepage
2. reviewing the hard copy list
3. requesting a current listing from the Secretariat 4.
B. The recipient makes a request by e-mail to the repository secretariat by, 1. using e-mail
2. filling the WWW form
3. mailing request
4. faxing request
5.
 *** ISSUE - Can we use electronic signatures on the form or will just the submittal of the form be good enough for the release

C. The recipient receives the file by,
1. it is e-mailed to them
2. it is downloaded by the recipient off the WWW page 3.
V. Loading a text file into the NECPR (same as presentation except no additional info is added)
A. Once a file is received, it is logged in by recording the event in the receiving database
B. The file is checked for incoming viruses.
C. The file is loaded onto the development system in a private area D. The file is checked to verify that the description is accurate 1. if any information is missing on the submittal form, it is generated by the project manager at this point if possible E. The file is transferred to the NECPR Secretariat who loads it on the distribution system
F. The distribution database is updated with the information for the new presentation

 E) Repository Input Form

1) Incoming form

1a) Please record the following information

  TITLE
?  TOPIC 1st Keyword (pick from below)
?  TOPIC 2nd Keyword
?  Length or Format - minutes  / # of slides
  Ex. 40 Slides or 10 Pages Text or 10 Pages PDF ?  Target Audience
>  Contact Info - phone number
  Ex. Name, Affiliation, Phone

Keywords
  Development Resources / facilities available
  Templates for transactions / procedures
  Metrics for success
  Legislation / pending changes
  Publishing / SGML / IETM
  Standards
  Educational / tutorials
  Security
  User Group Operation / tips
  Pilot Projects
  Data Configuration / Management
  Electronic Data Exchange
  Integration of EDI and Internal Applications
  Technical Data Exchange
  Product / Process Data  Driven Manufacturing
  Distributed Collaborative Engineering
  Network Based Outsourcing
  Virtual Enterprises

I certify that the above mentioned presentation(s) are free of commercialism, is approved for unlimited distribution free of any charge, and does not contain copyrighted material. The author should be credited on all distributions of this presentation in whole or in part.

signature __________________________________ date _________
 Information to be recorded about each incoming presentation in the database

Example:
1) Name: Gary Conkol
2) Affiliation: Cleveland ECRC Integrators Office 3) Contact Information phone, e-mail: 216-432-4195, gary.conkol@camp.org 4) Topic(s): CAD/CAM/CAE, Technology Assessment and trends, Users Groups 5) Do Expenses need to be paid ? [] Yes, [x] Maybe, [] No 6) Is there a fee for speaking ? [] Yes, [] Maybe, [x] No 7) Length of Talk (minutes or number of slides/pages): 15-30 min , 15 pages 8) Target Audience: End users, planning staffs, engineering / manufacturing 9) A/V required on site: PC projector
10) Is presentation available : [x]distributed on site, [x] on repository, [] loan, [] purchase
11) and in what format : Powerpoint, Overheads, or 35mm slides 12) Date last updated: May 21, 1997
13) Location: Cleveland, Ohio
14) Other: Repository file name(s):
a) Filename : RIGS.PPT
b) Topic(s) : 1st level - information, updates c) 2nd level - RIGs, Users Groups
d) 3 rd level - Collaborative Projects, nationally and internationally e) Format - PPT
f) Length of Talk (minutes / number of slides): 15 minutes g) Target Audience: Groups, National Boards, people seeking input of projects
h) Are you available to make this presentation in person ? yes i) Date of  presentation in repository : June 13, 1997

2) Outgoing Form / Request for download

Warning
? While all files are virus scanned, no warranties, implied or explicit, are given in regard to the files. It is recommended that you scan each file before accessing or executing it.
? By accepting the files it is understood that you hold all parties associated with the generation, collection, and dissemination of the files harmless in the event of any negative impact.
? When using the files in whole or in part, please give credit to the original author and organization if this information is available.
? Your comments are welcome. Please provide feedback to ___________


Presentation requested __________________ Name _________________________
Signature ______________________

Attachment 2 - Sample Keywords
** Development Resources / facilities available ** Templates for transactions / procedures ** Metrics for success
** Legislation / pending changes
** Publishing / SGML / IETM
** Standards
** Educational / tutorials
** Security
** User Group Operation / tips
** Pilot Projects
** Data Configuration / Management
** Electronic Data Exchange
** Integration of EDI and Internal Applications ** Technical Data Exchange
** Product / Process Data  Driven Manufacturing ** Distributed Collaborative Engineering ** Network Based Outsourcing
** Virtual Enterprises

 ************
Attachment C
************
Regional Interest Group and User Group Roster Update 8/13/97

* National - Gary Conkol - chairman - 216-432-4195/216-432-4341fax - gary.conkol@camp.org
National - Jim Snyder - vice chairman - 423-220-2024 snyder@ornl.gov

*Alabama, Huntsville - Jim Neiers - 205-650-4601 /  (ththomps@iquest.com) California, Los Angeles - Michaelene Kubeck - 310-627-3339 kubeck@c17m.mdc.com
California, Oakland - Jim George 510-267-7408  / jgeorge260@aol.com *Colorado, Denver - Ron Schuldt - 303-977-1414 Florida, Kennedy Space Center - Russ Walker - 407-867-5634 Florida, Orlando (healthcare)- Carole Hanon, 407-895-7886 Georgia, Atlanta - Neil Hall - 404-894-4788 / neil.hall@ecrc.gatech.edu Indiania, Indianapolis - Linda Perdue - 317-575-9696 * (offline) Maryland, Southern - Bob Austin - 301-863-4316 * Minnesota, St.Paul (healthcare) - Patrice Thaler - 612-228-4378 * Missouri, St. Louis - Dave Utterback - 314-225-5939 / dutterback@sprintmail.com
* Missouri, St. Louis - Laurie Pererfreund - 314-889-3433 New York, Long Island - Jim Edwardson - 516-924-1700 / ceo@gap.net North Carolina, Laurinburg - Angel Levin - 910-277-3689 Ohio, Cleveland - Leo Roth Klein - 216-987-3095 / leo.klein@camp.org * (offline) Oklahoma, Ardmore - Roger Graves - 405-223-6141 rgraves@southern.tec.ok.us
Pennsylvania, Scranton - Connie Wisdo, Nelson Pinto, Bill Morris - 707-941-4123 / morrisw1@uofs.edu
* (offline)Rhode Island - Mike Cesino - 401-277-2601 / riecondev@aol.com Tennessee, Oak Ridge - Jim Snyder - 423-220-2024 / snyderjr@ornl.gov Tennessee, Oak Ridge - Al Klein - 423-576-5881 / ajk@ornl.gov *Texas, Central - Burton Anderson - 210-732-1141 *Texas, Dallas/Ft. Worth - Marian Hiler - 214-266-4163 * Texas, Palestine - Bob Platt - Walter Tate 800-209-2772 Texas, San Antonio - Raul Santiago - 210-925-3056 rlsantia@tilcpo.kelly.af.mil
* Washington, Bremerton - George Beida, Ray Newell - 360-405-5420 / bieda@ctc.com
* Washington, Bremerton - Ron Gillis - 360-779-7178 Washington, Pacific Northwest - Steve Shoemaker - 509-375-6392