Reference: / Writing date: / Page:
Eurostat:
X-DIS/XBRL / 21-12-2006 / 1
Software AG:
PHC6CE1/C6A-0010
Project / date / Hour / Meeting Place
X-DIS/XBRL Project / 21/12/200610:00 / Video-Conference
Writing Person / Issue / Goal
Adolfo Rodríguez / Monthly Progress Meeting

Note: In case some of the attendeesare not in agreement with part or the totality of these minutes, it has a term of fifteen working days to notify it to the writing person in charge that will come to its revision and rectification if therefore it is decided. If not claims, esteem that all the assistants give their conformity to this minutes.

Attendees

Eurostat

Ms. Claudia Junker

Mr. Giuseppe Sindoni

Mr. Leonard Maqua

Software AG

Mr. Adolfo Rodríguez

Mr.Francisco Javier Cobo García

Excused

Mr.Justo Martín Fernandez (Software AG)

Treated ISSUES

The meeting started at 10:00 a.m. in the respective Video-Conference venues for Eurostat and Software AG Teams.

The agenda adopted for the meeting is depicted below:

(1)Adoption of the agenda –acceptance of previous meetings minutes,

(2)Presentation of the monthly progress report – acceptance of previous reports,

(3)Follow-up, action list

(4)Outstanding issues

- Request for local extension to taxonomy from INE

(5)A.O.B.

(6)Conclusions

(7)Date and time of next meeting

The most important issues raised from the meeting are the following:

  • There were some technical problems with the image of the VC. Software AG could enjoy the image of the ESTAT Team but, on the opposite, ESTAT could not see Software AG. Despite these technical issues, the conference could finally take place by audio means.
  • ESTAT commented about the approvalof the previous meeting minutesas well as the previous Monthly Progress Reports.
  • ESTAT suggest to Software AG sending the Monthly Meeting Report some days before the Monthly Report. The report for November was not delivered on time. Software AG apologises for the inconvenience and takes into mention the organizational issues taking place as a consequence of the sickness of the Project Manager and necessities of refactoring of the Team because of the project extension and future projects.
  • Mr. JustoMartín will be presented as the next Project Manager. However, he could not joint to day to the VC. This allows for an official presentation introduction in the meeting of 17th January. Mr. Javier Cobo, was on the VC by the Software AG side but he was not introduced by the lack of image waiting to the 8th January.
  • Software AG has commented about the work being carried out on month of November mainly focused on pushing the Test Phases, especially for INE and maintaining some emails with the representatives of Statbel and CBS. However, the main task that the Team coped to in the current month has been the implementation of the XBRL architecture, as described below.
  • Pertaining to the INE situation, the conversations to find the best way to carry out the Test Phase are going on. The latest meeting with INE from the Software AG Team was held 19th December. It validates the calendar previously scheduled for the Test Phase, aligned with the official 2007 collection. Check the minutes for further details on the calendar.
  • INE has sent to Software AG a new set of remarks for the taxonomy. As soon as the different INE departments make a review of their specific parts of the taxonomy, their findings are emailed to Software AG. They will need to be incorporated and modified in the taxonomy but it generates a delay and spreading the work in random packages with difficult following a prescheduled project plan.
  • On the other hand, the issue about how to cover the 21 sectoral amendments for the National extension was discussed. The work effort estimated to fulfil this requisition was about one person one month. INE intended, at the first option, to check if the funding to accomplish this task would be provided by ESTAT. If not, INE and Software AG would evaluate which one could fill this necessity. As commented by ESTAT in the VC, their position is that extra work can fit within the budget for the second phase of the Project. The Team representing Software AG in the VC agreed in transferring this point of view to the stakeholders so conversations can be taken beyond if required by the management.
  • Pertaining to the CBS relationships, it is recognized to be slowed down at the current time. Mr. Marco Roos has sent information about SBS entry point on NTP (taxonomy schema) as well as sample report. Software AG has deliver to Mr. Roos a draft of the XBRL architecture design in order to get the CBS feedback. The consign for the future actions was recovering the contact with Mr. Marco Roos about their feedback and take advantages for applying for more instances of NTP for SBS.
  • For the Statbel the current situation was raised. As agreed with Mr. Goddeeris, the Software AG Team will visit 9th January to Statbel in Belgium. Statbel has delivered also their SBS taxonomy to Software AG Team which enables making testing to the architecture being developed based on real cases. In the same email, Statbel has notified about a document being sent shortly raising comments and remarks of the XBRL architecture draft design as feedback.
  • With relation to the XBRL architecture, which took quite important resources quantity of the project, Software AG confirmed that ESTAT has received the Project Plan, presentation and draft design document. They are the first deliverables for the product. Some issues has been commented about it. On one hand, the software pieces will be extracted from some products of Software AG as the Digital Reporting Platform. The required pieces are embedded within the referred product so they are already implemented. The work mainly will focuses in decoupling this code from the Software AG proprietary products. This raises an issue about what the license of the released architecture will be and how it could impact on Software AG products. On the other hand, some of the pieces could be obtained on the free market place as ABRA XBRL wrapper. However, Software AG commented about their creators were and they discourage the current version 0.8 available on the market by the reason of being a buggy version.
  • Perhaps the most important standing issue currently on the project is clarifying organizational concerns triggered by some project events. The clarification of these issues, which must be performed by the management, will draw a project plan for the next futureand the resources required for carrying it out.
  • The suggested date for the next Progress meeting, which should allow to solve some of the current misunderstanding is designed to be a physical one. It has been scheduled for Thursday, 18th January. This meeting is expected to be a face to face meeting in Luxembourg and the date must be confirmed by email from the Software AG side.
  • The meeting finish at 11:10

further Actions

action / responsible / date
ACTION 01.12 –
Confirm the meeting from the Software AG side, which includes both Spain and Germany branches in order to clarify the outstanding organization issues. / Software AG / Taking place currently
ACTION 02.12 –
Speed up the relationships with the NSIs in order to carry out Test Phases. / Software AG / ASAP
ACTION 03.12 –
Notify INE and Software AG about the ESTAT position on the INE taxonomy extension necessities (covered by next Phase of project) / Software AG / Done
ACTION 04.12 –
Software AG will send a document exposing the options available for the SBS sectors of insurance and pension funds. / Software AG / ASAP
ACTION 06.12 –
Software AG will notify about the NTP mapping process and will apply for more NTP instances to CBS / Software AG / ASAP
/ Confidential Document property of Eurostat /