Agenda and Minutes

Main Topics

Use

1. Review Existing Documentation & Resources

   1. Topic Leader:

   2. The desired outcome is that the audience is informed about the background/purpose of the project and current resources available.

   3. Pre-meeting notes and references:

      1. https://github.com/AgGateway/Dispensing

      2. https://aggateway.atlassian.net/l/cp/GHGZ2RCN

      3. https://aggateway.atlassian.net/l/cp/DmLoC2Nk

      4. https://aggateway.atlassian.net/l/cp/nAQh8nx1

      5. https://aggateway.atlassian.net/l/cp/VDx0vPxP

   4. Minutes:

      1. Briefly looked through links, no comments

2. Discussion

   1. Topic Leader: Doug Applegate

   2. The desired outcome is that group discusses current state of Mix Ticket, interest in updating or what the group feels should happen, if anything

   3. Pre-meeting notes and references:

   4. Minutes:

      1. Adoption, why or why not are people adopting

         1. Praxidyne

            1. API is based on Mix Ticket but have a few things that are not required that they are treating as required and a few other variances

            2. There are things like Parties that could generate a bill of lading, etc. for stationary plants

               1. Includes extra information beyond what was mixed, more for trucking

               2. Question on if that needs to be handled differently if all of that is really required

               3. For their use would prefer not to include that as it is a different business process than mixing

               4. Feel it is possibly out of scope for a mixing operation

               5. May be a difference between a mixing facility and mixing in a field

         2. Kahler

            1. A lot of the integrations seem to be very one-off with specific data requirements by customer

            2. Basically there is the same data but every connection seems to be special

               1. Question on if they are really special of if there is a dividing line that moves on who does what

               2. e.g. something that the mixing system handles in the field or something the ERP does in the field

               3. Leads to some messy UI issues for the mixing system with requirements for things that are maybe not directly focused on the mixing operation

            3. Is there core data this could focus on that would be able to standardized on

               1. Originally was the goal of the project to make it simple, but a lot of extra stuff was added back in, it was pared back down but ended up being somewhere in the middle of minimal and too complex

            4. Have implemented message with other AgGateway members but have had some confusion on what versions or even what parts of Mix Ticket were used

         3. Great goal to drive this

            1. It is a lot of work to do one-off integrations

            2. Both up front connection, documentation, maintenance

            3. Very difficult to get everyone on the same page

            4. Would be good to know what. if anything is preventing people from implementing

            5. Need some sort of more direct outreach to get feedback/engagement

      2. One thing missing is rates

         1. Blends are represented as totals

         2. Water and chemical

            1. One marked carrier

            2. Optional to add an area

            3. Users want the ability to adjust utilizing rates

               1. Order comes in for 300 ac, but want to make the batch for 320 (aerial)

               2. Be able to adjust the carrier to be able to enable that change

      3. Terminology sometimes confusing

         1. Batch of jobs will load a plane that will travel across several fields that get the same mixture and application rate

         2. Believe mix ticket handles this but might needs some additional rules/implementation guide

            1. Need to be able to receive the group of jobs but report back individually

         3. Likely need a little better explanation/rules on how things work for the data exchange

         4. Make sure the business process on how it is used is clear

         5. Believe the original team made the schema and some technical support materials but may not have clearly documented expected process boundaries etc.

      4. Question about when a work order is sent out that has parties etc.

         1. Would prefer not to take all that data in and store it

         2. Is it possible to only send back a work record that contains new information

         3. Just “fill in the blanks” for the work record and not have to regurgitate all the repeated information form the work order

            1. Question if an change is made at the field for additional pest, change of rate, etc.

            2. Can cause issues if identifiers do not match when work record goes back to ERP

            3. Question on if the work order needs to be modified first so there is no mis-match

            4. For businesses that makes sense, but points to the need for a definition of the business process is intended to work

            5. Raises the question on what product list is available to operators to make changes

               1. Question on if InFieldProductID could be leveraged to get a product list

3. …

Closing Topics