Josh opened discussion. 

David Surber (Unlicensed) reviewed work done to date. 

Scott Nieman commented that tomorrow will have a session on proof of concept product catalog, with running code. It can provide a product definition with package information. Some other attributes include:

• Active ingredient
• Product density (needed for mixes)

Suggested there is value for bringing this in to AGIIS (the catalog routing or at a minimum support for the message and some subset of data elements). 

Jeremy W Wilson commented on issues with co-packs, identification of custom blends when co-pack is in play - what happens when product is custom blended? Who assigns the identifiers and how does that trace back to the supply chain information? Hit a road block with this piece.

Can we use mix information - actives and percentages - as the identifier? Don't know if we can do this by moving it to the grower. Mix Ticket is an analog but an imperfect one. 

Josh Wall (Unlicensed) notes the challenges with data availability. Noted that most manufacturers don't store formulation information in their system of record to share - regardless of how we want it to be used downstream. David Surber (Unlicensed) reminds the team that manufacturers were several years away from standing up yet another identification scheme.

Jeremy W Wilson suggests there may be some solutions available via a linked data discussion to be headed by Joe Tevis this week at conference. Linked Data is intended to roll up separate identifiers and tie them together through a transactional chain of some chain. 

Josh Wall (Unlicensed) observed this conversation is exactly why we are moving to the meet up structure.

Room asked to provide input on GTIN interest in CP messaging.

• Who is asking for this? Retail primarily
• What is being used? Reporting ID today; barcode applied to the product is often GS1 spec based. 
• Manufacturer feedback:
  • Customer reporting complexity
  • Syngenta observed that the product catalog POC showed some concerns about data quality; uncertain if the barcoding is in play
  • Noted that the change between packages can result in change to GTIN which may not be reflected in a Product ID change 

Discussion on uniqueness of reporting ID versus GTIN

From the retailer's inventory management system a GTIN is valuable for packaging 

Observed that message  version is a potential issue, though not an insurmountable one

What is being used on product catalog? GTIN and manufacturer's identifier. Is this the reporting ID? Maybe, but not always. 

What about insights from Channel Integrity? That initiative is more transactional and considering use of serialized GTIN. Level of complexity even higher there, but agreement that there will still be a need to link the transactional to the reference level for inventory alignment, customer service, reporting requirements, etc. Still breaks down at the field operational level. 

Is there an industry appetite to move to a common identifier? Referenced experience with AEC, SCII, observing that there were expectations set. Why couldn't we use GTIN in AEC? Manufacturers were not integral within the mfr's business system. Assigned codes all the time but had no way to transact back into their internal processes. 

David Surber (Unlicensed) noted that there are some other tracks that may be tackling product identifier from a different perspective that could inform how we proceed? 

Is this based on reality? If you can't transact business omg the GTIN why are we building this in to the processes? If there's a valid enough business case then manufacturers will implement the changes to their systems.

Does the product catalog help drive the value discussion? Suggests that the value realized from implementing a retail facing eCommerce catalog may drive participants to solve the integration to the supply chain order to invoice process between supplier, distributor and retailer. 

Document next steps

Rob Bullock will have some internal conversations to see about interest in a research project re: user story documentation. Noted that global scope would be valuable.

Matt Garcia will review documentation available from prior teams and provide that for comment.

Following conference a new Meet Ups section will appear on the wiki homepage and notes, supporting documents from this and other discussions will post there.