I just want to echo and reinforce Doug's comments. And yes, I was a volunteer for many years. As an independent consultant I joined X12/DISA as an Independent Member in 1993 paying the individual membership fee each year. And from 1993 through either 2004 or 2005 I attended each X12 Trimester meeting in person, paying my own lodging, airfare, etc. I had no company backing me. Prior to 1993 I was the voting representative from Baxter Healthcare to X12 during which time Baxter Healthcare maintained a corporate membership. As I'm sure Doug and Mike will attest, even though you may be an employee of a corporate member and they are funding your efforts, my experience was that I spent many hours of my "off-the-clock" so to speak time doing the "volunteer" work at X12.
And yes, the standards do change from version to version - sometime substantially and sometimes less so. I recall what some might consider to be a small change to the N1 segment years ago in the early 1990s when I submitted and championed a Change Request to add two data elements. Now, if your company or industry had no need for to use those 2 additional data elements, then no problem. However, these 2 additional data elements were needed and used by the medical products supply chain industry and retail (as I remember, it was Coca Cola that needed these data elements as well) and the change request ended up with a new segment, the NM1. And as Leah has said, there are many companies that are still using version 2001 - and it is serving them well. I would bet, though, that those very companies that are still using v2001 for some transactions are also user newer versions for other business transactions. So, we are not in a static world - while some business needs are unchanging others are much more dynamic. So, yes, I'm not in favor of this new fee structure and the fees per se for the standards. I've felt for some years that X12 needs to find a new business model that will be sustainable going forward that will generate the level of revenue needed. Relying only on membership fees and the sale of work products doesn't appear to be the model for the future. For example, consideration could be given to a fee for attending meetings - I believe HL7 does this in the U.S. Don't know about other ANSI-accredited SDOs, but it sure is worth considering. I believe that the overall cost to DISA for just the in-person meetings is a substantial cost - and as a result, many of the subcommittees decided to not conduct 3 in-person meetings annually. I suspect there are other ideas that could surface as well. Rachel Foerster 847-872-8070 From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Doug Anderson Sent: Tuesday, July 02, 2013 5:04 PM To: 'Earl Wertheimer'; [email protected] Subject: RE: [EDI-L] Standards price change? Earl We are getting off subject. But here goes...... Interesting cite, but I don't think it is applicable. The new pricing Bill mentioned in his original post is not retroactive as far as I know. GS1 Canada is not related to X12/DISA, other then they are a member. So I don't think your experience with them is relevant to this discussion. I don't know if I agree with your 5 points. But you are entitled to your opinion. However, the standard does change over time, just look at the 214 in version 003070, 004010, and finally 005010 as an example. Similar in some respects, but clearly not identical. And backwards compatibility is never assured. You mean you charge for your software and or other services???? :-) It should be free. j/k of course Yes there is a lot of time and effort that goes into developing and maintaining the X12 Standards. I have been involved for over 25 years, over 20 as a chair of a subcommittee. Yes, I am a volunteer, well my company, Kleinschmidt, pays for my volunteer time. Getting back to the subject at hand. I too agree with Mike that this is not the way to price our standards. I have voiced that many times at the Steering Committee but it does not seem to be the opinion of the majority of members of the Steering Committee. >From a company perspective, we have been a good corporate citizen over the years. My time invested in the standard is paid for by Kleinschmidt. Before I joined Kleinschmidt 15 years ago, we had other folks involved. We have purchased the table data year after year, even when some versions are not being implemented. We do object to paying a renewal fee for something that we helped develop. Discussions here point to not purchasing 6050 at this time. I am hopeful that DISA will reconsider. Doug Doug Anderson Chair, Transportation Subcommittee Vice President Sales Support Kleinschmidt 847-405-7457 (office) 847-826-3531 (cell) http://www.kleinschmidt.com <http://www.kleinschmidt.com/> Socialize with Kleinschmidt <http://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-snc6/179550_119888834821933_456161062 _n.jpg> <http://www.facebook.com/kleinschmidtinc> Like Us on Facebook <http://www.twitter.com/kleinschmidtedi> Follow Us on Twitter <http://www.linkedin.com/companies/kleinschmidt> <http://www.itunes.com/apps/kEDI> Click to Download kEDI -----Original Message----- From: Earl Wertheimer [mailto:[email protected] <mailto:earlw%40spe-edi.com> ] Sent: Tuesday, July 02, 2013 12:06 PM To: [email protected] <mailto:EDI-L%40yahoogroups.com> Subject: Re: [EDI-L] Standards price change? Doug > We have had this discussion before, free vs. fee. I don't want us to head > down that rabbit hole again. You call it a rabbit hole. I would call it inevitable. > Bill's original post was concerning a change in pricing policy. Yes. I am reminded of the ill-fated decision to start sending invoices for UPC codes many years ago. http://www.barcodestalk.com/ucc-settlement <http://www.barcodestalk.com/ucc-settlement> My experiences with ECCC (Canadian branch of GS1) were not much better. A client had used a UPC prefix many years ago, but had 'forgotten' it. I had a record of it, but wanted confirmation. I contacted ECCC and asked them if they would tell the client what their UPC prefix was, so that they could start using it. THEY REFUSED. They said that the client would have to join ECCC and purchase a new code. I send a complaint to GS1. They ignored it. > However, you state that you have never purchased the X12 Standard. I am > curious, how do you write your EDI software without the base standard? In my small corner of EDI, all the specifications are published by the various Trading Partners. After doing a few dozen 210 or 810 documents, it doesn't require the published spec to figure out what's required and see what the common denominators are. Having the base standard is pretty useless because a) Most of it is not used b) If a Partner does something non-standard, what are you going to do? c) Partners publish their own requirements. d) the new version is almost identical to the previous version e) there are so many different interpretations and implementations of the base standard, that paying for it is a waste. Finally, I don't charge $60,000 for my software. I certainly appreciate the time and effort that goes into maintaining the standard, but your efforts are being abused. > -----Original Message----- > From: Earl Wertheimer [mailto: [email protected] <mailto:earlw%40spe-edi.com> <mailto:earlw%40spe-edi.com> ] > Sent: Tuesday, July 02, 2013 9:05 AM > To: [email protected] <mailto:EDI-L%40yahoogroups.com> <mailto:EDI-L%40yahoogroups.com> ; Mike Rawlins > Subject: Re: [EDI-L] Standards price change? > > > > > Mike > > > I'm curious, if you don't mind: How many of you on this list routinely > > purchase the latest version of the X12 standard every year. > > Never bought it. > > The revenue goes to support inflated salaries and overpriced rents. > > In the few years that I saw DISAs financial records, the primary expense was > > salaries and benefits. > > Like any other bureaucratic entity, DISA exists to provide nice jobs for its > > employees. > > The X12 standard should be free. > > > On 6/28/2013 11:12 AM, Klaus-Dieter Naujok wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Jun 28, 2013, at 9:06 AM, Bill Lester wrote: > > > > > > > Klaus, so you think if I buy the CD and load the codes into my > > > business application, I am liable for the maintenance fee? Even if I > > > never use the CD again. > > > > > > That's my reading of the terms, since your business application is a > > > derivative of the product (the CD content). I don't agree with this > > > type of licensing and lucky for me, my products and services are > > > UN/EDIFACT based. > > > > > > Since we have a few X12'ers on this list, I am sure they can explain > > > in detail the implication of this new pricing scheme. > > > > > > Klaus > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------ > > > > ... > > Please use the following Message Identifiers as your subject prefix: > <SALES>, <JOBS>, <LIST>, <TECH>, <MISC>, <EVENT>, <OFF-TOPIC> > > > > Job postings are welcome, but for job postings or requests for work: > <JOBS> IS REQUIRED in the subject line as a prefix.Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus > signature database 8514 (20130701) __________ > > > > The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus. > > > > http://www.eset.com <http://www.eset.com> < http://www.eset.com <http://www.eset.com> > > > > > > > > > Earl Wertheimer > [email protected] <mailto:earlw%40spe-edi.com> <mailto:earlw%40spe-edi.com> <mailto:earlw%40spe-edi.com> > http://www.spe-edi.com <http://www.spe-edi.com> < http://www.spe-edi.com <http://www.spe-edi.com> > > > > > > > > > [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> > > Job postings are welcome, but for job postings or requests for work: <JOBS> IS REQUIRED in the subject line as a prefix.Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 8517 (20130702) __________ > > The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus. > > http://www.eset.com <http://www.eset.com> > > > Earl Wertheimer [email protected] <mailto:earlw%40spe-edi.com> <mailto:earlw%40spe-edi.com> http://www.spe-edi.com <http://www.spe-edi.com> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] [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> Job postings are welcome, but for job postings or requests for work: <JOBS> IS REQUIRED in the subject line as a prefix.Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EDI-L/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EDI-L/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: [email protected] [email protected] <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [email protected] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
