CEN TR 16931-6-2017 Electronic invoicing - Part 6 Result of the test of EN 16931-1 with respect to its practical application for an end user.pdf

1、Electronic invoicingPart 6: Result of the test of EN 16931-1 with respect to its practical application for an end userPD CEN/TR 16931-6:2017BSI Standards PublicationWB11885_BSI_StandardCovs_2013_AW.indd 1 15/05/2013 15:06TECHNICAL REPORT RAPPORT TECHNIQUE TECHNISCHER BERICHT CEN/TR 16931-6 October 2

2、017 ICS 35.240.20; 35.240.63 English Version Electronic invoicing - Part 6: Result of the test of EN 16931-1 with respect to its practical application for an end user Facturation lectronique - Rsultat de lessai portant sur la Norme europenne concernant sa mise en application pratique pour un utilisa

3、teur final Elektronische Rechnungsstellung - Ergebnis der Prfung der EN 16931-1 auf ihre praktische Anwendbarkeit durch einen Endnutzer This Technical Report was approved by CEN on 15 October 2017. It has been drawn up by the Technical Committee CEN/TC 434.CEN members are the national standards bodi

4、es of Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Serbia, Slovakia, Slov

5、enia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey and United Kingdom. EUROPEAN COMMITTEE FOR STANDARDIZATION COMIT EUROPEN DE NORMALISATION EUROPISCHES KOMITEE FR NORMUNG CEN-CENELEC Management Centre: Avenue Marnix 17, B-1000 Brussels 2017 CEN All rights of exploitation in any form and by any means reserved

6、 worldwide for CEN national Members. Ref. No. CEN/TR 16931-6:2017 ENational forewordThis Published Document is the UK implementation of CEN/TR 16931-6:2017.The UK participation in its preparation was entrusted to Technical Committee IST/47/-/2, E-invoicing.A list of organizations represented on this

7、 committee can be obtained on request to its secretary.This publication does not purport to include all the necessary provisions of a contract. Users are responsible for its correct application. The British Standards Institution 2017 Published by BSI Standards Limited 2017ISBN 978 0 580 98710 6ICS 3

8、5.240.63; 35.240.20Compliance with a British Standard cannot confer immunity from legal obligations.This Published Document was published under the authority of the Standards Policy and Strategy Committee on 30 November 2017.Amendments/corrigenda issued since publicationDate Text affectedPUBLISHED D

9、OCUMENTPD CEN/TR 169316:2017TECHNICAL REPORT RAPPORT TECHNIQUE TECHNISCHER BERICHT CEN/TR 16931-6 October 2017 ICS 35.240.20; 35.240.63 English Version Electronic invoicing - Part 6: Result of the test of EN 16931-1 with respect to its practical application for an end user Facturation lectronique -

10、Rsultat de lessai portant sur la Norme europenne concernant sa mise en application pratique pour un utilisateur final Elektronische Rechnungsstellung - Ergebnis der Prfung der EN 16931-1 auf ihre praktische Anwendbarkeit durch einen Endnutzer This Technical Report was approved by CEN on 15 October 2

11、017. It has been drawn up by the Technical Committee CEN/TC 434.CEN members are the national standards bodies of Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, L

12、atvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey and United Kingdom. EUROPEAN COMMITTEE FOR STANDARDIZATION COMIT EUROPEN DE NORMALISATION EUROPISCHES KOMITEE FR NORMUNG CEN-CENELEC Management Centre:

13、Avenue Marnix 17, B-1000 Brussels 2017 CEN All rights of exploitation in any form and by any means reserved worldwide for CEN national Members. Ref. No. CEN/TR 16931-6:2017 EPD CEN/TR 169316:2017CEN/TR 16931-6:2017 (E) 2 Contents Page European foreword 5 0 Introduction 6 0.1 Summary 6 0.2 Requiremen

14、ts for testing derived from European legislation . 6 1 Scope 7 1.1 Introduction 7 1.2 In scope . 7 1.3 Out of scope . 7 2 Normative references 8 3 Terms and definitions . 8 4 Testing 8 4.1 General 8 4.2 Semantic testing 9 4.2.1 Introduction 9 4.2.2 The standardization request and specific requiremen

15、ts . 9 4.2.3 The Semantic testing of real instances 14 4.2.4 Findings and recommendations 14 4.2.5 Conclusion of semantic testing 15 4.3 Syntax testing . 15 5 Generating invoice instances 16 5.1 Requirements . 16 5.2 Generating Instances . 16 5.2.1 Methodology . 16 5.2.2 Generating invoice instances

16、 17 5.2.3 Error-free instance . 17 5.2.4 Pushing errors in instance 17 6 Validation of invoice instances 18 6.1 General 18 6.2 Validation of UBL instances. 18 6.2.1 Test instances and preparation . 18 6.2.2 Adjustments of provided “real-world” sample files . 18 6.2.3 Creation of manipulated instance

17、s provoking errors . 18 6.2.4 Test tools used . 19 6.2.5 Test procedure . 19 6.2.6 Test results 19 6.3 Validation of CII instances . 19 6.3.1 Test instances and preparation . 19 6.3.2 Instances as provided by CEN/TC 434 . 20 6.3.3 Creation of manipulated instances provoking single errors (BR and SR)

18、 . 20 6.3.4 Adjustments of provided “real-world” sample files . 20 6.3.5 Test tools used . 20 6.3.6 Test procedure . 20 6.3.7 Test results 21 6.4 Validation of EDIFACT instances . 21 PD CEN/TR 169316:2017CEN/TR 16931-6:2017 (E) 3 6.4.1 Test instances and preparation . 21 6.4.2 Adjustments of provide

19、d “real-world” sample files . 21 6.4.3 Creation of manipulated instances provoking single errors (BR and SR) . 21 6.4.4 Test tools used . 22 6.4.5 Test procedure 22 6.4.6 Test results 22 7 Transmission 22 7.1 Methodology . 22 7.2 Invoice Provider Basic Conformance Test for UBL syntax and PEPPOL AS2

20、protocol 23 7.2.1 Overview 23 7.2.2 Actors 23 7.2.3 Test Scenario 24 7.3 Invoice Provider Basic Conformance Test for EDIFACT syntax and OFTP2 protocol 26 7.3.1 Overview 26 7.3.2 Actors 26 7.3.3 Standards and Specifications . 26 7.3.4 Test Scenario 27 7.3.5 An example execution of a test case . 27 7.

21、4 Test results 30 8 Presentation and visualization of instances . 30 8.1 General . 30 8.2 Requirements . 30 8.3 Test methodology applied . 31 8.3.1 Process 31 8.3.2 Overview of representation methods and tools 31 8.3.3 Examples for XML based instance representations . 31 8.3.4 Microsoft Excel interp

22、retation of an XML instance 33 8.3.5 Visualizations in ERP systems 33 8.3.6 XSL Transformation Example Transformation XML to HTML . 34 9 Payment . 37 9.1 Requirements . 37 9.2 Automatic processing for invoice to SEPA payment reconciliation . 38 9.3 Test Methodology Applied . 39 9.3.1 Methodology . 3

23、9 9.3.2 Caveats 40 9.4 Test Execution 40 9.4.1 Semantic Model . 40 9.5 Test Results . 46 9.5.1 Semantic Model . 46 9.5.2 Traceability and Automated Reconciliation . 47 10 Automatic processing 47 10.1 Requirements . 47 10.2 Testing 48 10.3 Test results 48 11 Conclusions . 49 Annex A (informative) WG6

24、 Comment resolution on Semantic model 50 Annex B (informative) List of visualization systems. 58 Annex C (informative) What is GITB? . 59 C.1 Introduction . 59 PD CEN/TR 169316:2017CEN/TR 16931-6:2017 (E) 4 C.2 The GITB Testing Framework 59 C.2.1 GITB Methodology 59 C.2.2 GITB Architecture . 60 C.3

25、Implementation Specifications and Proof-of-Concept 60 C.3.1 Implementation Specifications 60 C.3.2 Prototype Test Registry and Repository 61 C.4 Validation and transmission testing 61 C.4.1 What to Test? 61 C.4.2 How to Test? 61 C.4.3 Test Suite, Test Case and Messaging Adapters . 63 C.5 CEN/TC 434

26、usage of GITB and Test Cases 65 C.5.1 Overview 65 C.5.2 Standalone Document Validation Test Cases for the Invoice Providers . 66 C.6 Test execution 68 C.6.1 General 68 C.6.2 Standalone Document Validation through the GITB website . 68 C.6.3 Invoice Provider Basic Conformance Test for UBL syntax and

27、PEPPOL AS2 protocol . 75 C.6.4 Invoice Provider Basic Conformance Test for EDIFACT syntax and OFTP2 protocol 81 C.6.5 OFTP2 Message Validation 82 Bibliography . 84 PD CEN/TR 169316:2017CEN/TR 16931-6:2017 (E) 5 European foreword This document (CEN/TR 16931-6:2017) has been prepared by Technical Comm

28、ittee CEN/TC 434 “Electronic invoicing”, the secretariat of which is held by NEN. Attention is drawn to the possibility that some of the elements of this document may be the subject of patent rights. CEN and/or CENELEC shall not be held responsible for identifying any or all such patent rights. This

29、 document has been prepared under a mandate given to CEN by the European Commission and the European Free Trade Association. This document is part of a set of documents, consisting of: EN 16931-1:2017 Electronic invoicing - Part 1: Semantic data model of the core elements of an electronic invoice CE

30、N/TS 16931-2:2017 Electronic invoicing - Part 2: List of syntaxes that comply with EN 16931-1 CEN/TS 16931-3-1:2017 Electronic invoicing - Part 3 - 1: Methodology for syntax bindings of the core elements of an electronic invoice CEN/TS 16931-3-2:2017 Electronic invoicing - Part 3 - 2: Syntax binding

31、 for ISO/IEC 19845 (UBL 2.1) invoice and credit note CEN/TS 16931-3-3:2017 Electronic invoicing - Part 3 - 3: Syntax binding for UN/CEFACT XML Cross Industry Invoice D16B CEN/TS 16931-3-4:2017 Electronic invoicing - Part 3 - 4: Syntax binding for UN/EDIFACT INVOIC D16B CEN/TR 16931-4:2017 Electronic

32、 invoicing - Part 4: Guidelines on interoperability of electronic invoices at the transmission level CEN/TR 16931-5:2017 Electronic invoicing - Part 5: Guidelines on the use of sector or country extensions in conjunction with EN 16931-1, methodology to be applied in the real environment CEN/TR 16931

33、-6:2017 Electronic invoicing - Part 6: Result of the test of the European standard with respect to its practical application for an end user PD CEN/TR 169316:2017CEN/TR 16931-6:2017 (E) 6 0 Introduction 0.1 Summary The Technical Report contains the results of the testing. In summary, it should demon

34、strate that EN 16931-1 and its related specifications, particularly the syntax bindings, is fit for purpose. The report has three main sections, one for the semantic testing where an overview of the methodology, the testing and the results are described (Clause 4). The second section (Clauses 5 to 8

35、) is the syntax testing, and this is split in different subchapters to test all the steps needed to create and send an invoice instance. The final section (Clauses 9 to 10) describes the tests performed to ensure the EN is suitable for automatic processing. This section has two sub chapters, one for

36、 payments and one for automatic processing in general. 0.2 Requirements for testing derived from European legislation Article 3 of Directive 2014/55/EU 1 states that: “The Commission shall request that the relevant European standardisation organisation draft a European standard for the semantic data

37、 model of the core elements of an electronic invoice (the European standard on electronic invoicing). The Commission shall require that the European standard on electronic invoicing complies at least with the following criteria: it is technologically neutral, it is compatible with relevant internati

38、onal standards on electronic invoicing, it has regard to the need for personal data protection in accordance with Directive 95/46/EC 3, to a data protection by design approach and to the principles of proportionality, data minimization and purpose limitation, it is consistent with the relevant provi

39、sions of Directive 2006/112/EC 2, it allows for the establishment of practical, user-friendly, flexible and cost-efficient electronic invoicing systems, it considers the special needs of small and medium-sized enterprises as well as of sub-central contracting authorities and contracting entities, it

40、 is suitable for use in commercial transactions between enterprises.” Further on in article 3 the Directive 1 explicitly describes the task of testing: “the standard shall be tested as to its practical application for an end user. during the performance of the test, special account be taken of the r

41、espect for the criteria of practicality, user-friendliness and possible implementation costs” Testing is also described in note 28 of Directive 2014/55/EU 1: “Prior to the introduction of the European standard on electronic invoicing in the Member States, the practical application of the standard sh

42、ould be sufficiently tested. This assessment should be done during the drawing up of the standard. That assessment should involve end users, and should address aspects of practicality and user-friendliness, and should demonstrate that the standard can be implemented in a cost efficient and proportio

43、nate manner.” PD CEN/TR 169316:2017CEN/TR 16931-6:2017 (E) 7 1 Scope 1.1 Introduction Directive 2014/55/EU states the following: “the standard shall be tested as to its practical application for an end user. The Commission shall retain overall responsibility for the testing and shall ensure that, du

44、ring the performance of the test, special account be taken of the respect for the criteria of practicality, user-friendliness and possible implementation costs in accordance with the second subparagraph of paragraph 1. “ 1.2 In scope This CEN Technical Report describes the methodology used for testi

45、ng at a semantic level and at the syntax level, as well as describing the semantic testing, the syntax testing and testing of the validation artefacts that represent EN 16931-1 and the test results. The testing of the validation artefacts will ensure they can be used to automatically check conforman

46、ce with EN 16931-1. 1.3 Out of scope During meetings with the European Commission they agreed to supplement the testing activities as the need arises. This included the provision of a hosted GITB (Global eBusiness Interoperability Test Beds) environment for syntax testing and to run separate studies

47、 such as assessment of implementation costs. The results of these studies will be published separately by CEF. It was agreed at earlier meetings that piloting was out of scope i.e. perform live transactions, because resources were unavailable to undertake this in the time allowed. Instead we could s

48、imulate scenarios by leveraging on the experience of our experts. Working Group 3 (hereafter WG3) in CEN/TC 434 has produced the syntax bindings and validation artefacts, and the task of quality assurance of these deliverables has been the responsibility of WG3. VAT issues are complex and require ju

49、ridical or legal expertise. VAT is also sometimes very sectoral or even country specific. Certain sections, in the VAT Directive, apply to all trades, others deal with special cases. The model should facilitate, but cannot be seen as an enforcement model. Therefore, VAT compliance would have to be checked on a case by case basis, and is deemed out of scope. The Commission had taken this up and given the draft to their VAT experts. The result was that no issues were discovered. Article 226(B) of the VAT Direct