One tactic that I use to understand something is to compare and contrast what I want to understand to something else. I compared and contrasted the Semantic Web Stack and the XBRL stack. What became very apparent is the need for a Unifying Logic Framework for Business.
Let me explain. First, here are some things about what I call the Unifying Logic Framework for Business that you should understand. The framework itself is for expressing business logic, it is not the business logic itself. This is what the framework would achieve:
- a global standard logic framework for business (a global standard to use if you want)
- represent logic at a high enough level so that business professionals can understand the logic (as close to business logic as possible)
- approachable by business professionals (as easy to use as possible)
- represented using a controlled natural language format (as readable as English)
- built in but perhaps optional multidimensional model that does not force the use of OLAP, but usable with OLAP or OLTP (similar to a spreadsheet or pivot table really because it is dynamic)
- enables interoperability between technology stacks (works the same in all software applications)
- enables interoperability between XBRL, GLEI, FIBO (Financial Industry Business Ontology), FRO (Financial Regulation Ontology), the US GAAP XBRL Taxonomy, the IFRS XBRL Taxonomy, etc. (information technology professionals can integrate everything)
- built based on the logic framework of the Semantic Web Stack which has been evolving for 25 or so years (as powerful as possible, but safely implementable in software)
What would a business professional's interaction with something built using this framework look like? Basically, it would be very similar to interacting with a spreadsheet or a pivot table. This is achieved using proven software creation techniques, the concept is proven to be feasible. In the past I have described this as a semantic spreadsheet or NOLAP. The business logic glues things together, not presentation artifacts.
What form would such a Unifying Logic Framework for Business take? Does such a framework already exist? What do business professionals lose by not having such a framework? Who chooses what the framework is from the alphabet soup of ISO/IEC, OMG, W3C, and XBRL International standards? Is the unified logic defined by:
- ISO/IEC Common Logic (CL)?
- OMG Semantics of Business Vocabulary and Business Rules (SBVR)?
- W3C RDFS + OWL + RIF/SWRL syntax logic? (SWRL is not a recommendation, only a submission, RIF and SWRL seem to have issues)
- W3C RDFS + OWL + SHACL syntax logic which specifies closed world assumption and unique names assumption?
- Industry Initiative RuleLog which is designed to be appropriately expressive for supporting knowledge representation in complex domains and yet to be efficiently implementable?
- Industry Initiative RuleML which allows for partially constrained logic profiles and fully-specified logic semantics?
- XBRL Formula? (which has known deficiencies)
Could a de facto Unifying Logic Framework for Business be sufficient? More to come...stay tuned.
Article originally appeared on XBRL-based structured digital financial reporting (http://xbrl.squarespace.com/).
See website for complete article licensing information.