Advertisement

XBRL as eXtensible Reporting Language for EU Reporting

  • Maciej Piechocki
  • André Gräning
  • Harald Kienegger

Abstract

The eXtensible Business Reporting Language (XBRL) is a metadata representation language designed for a wide range of business reporting environments. Whilst primarily aimed at financial reporting, today XBRL is in use in not only for typical financial reporting domain, but also in various other business reporting scenarios. So for example, the Committee of European Banking Supervisors (CEBS) in its Common Reporting (COREP) taxonomy uses XBRL for reporting of solvency information for financial institutions (Boixo, Flores 2005). Another example is the EUROSTAT initiative that is analyzing the use of XBRL for statistical purposes for gathering business related information. Nonethless, each of these scenarios do not cross the border of what traditionally could be regarded as business reporting that is closely related to financial information. One of the possible reasons for this can be related to the profile of the participants of the XBRL International consortium that is responsible for the development of the language. Traditionally, the significant majority of these participants come from the financial reporting and related domains (XBRL 2006a). That is why it is important to evaluate XBRL use as a more universal metadata language. Observing the recent developments concerning XBRL in the European Union (EU) it can be clearly stated that due to its extensibility the XBRL standard is very useful in the many scenarios where the international reporting needs to be implemented at international and national levels. Usually the regulations are interpreted in paper form and often employ proprietary reporting solutions are implemented to enable data gathering. The innovative approach of the CEBS, with the European COREP XBRL taxonomy being extended on the level of European member stated, demonstrates the potential for standardisation and harmonisation of business reporting.

Keywords

European Union Member State Financial Reporting Energy Performance International Financial Reporting Standard 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Bergeron, B. (2003): Essentials of XBRL-Financial Reporting in the 21st Century, John Wiley & Sons, New Jersey.Google Scholar
  2. Boritz, J. E.; Won, G. N. (2005): Security in XML-based financial reporting services on the Internet, in: Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, No. 24, pp. 11–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Boixo, I.; Flores, F. (2005): New Technical and Normative Challenges for XBRL: Multidimensionality in the COREP Taxonomy, in: The International Journal of Digital Accounting Research 5(9).Google Scholar
  4. Bundesministerium für Wirtschaft und Technologie (2006): Tiefensee und Glos bringen Energieausweise für Gebäude und Wohnungen auf den Weg, http://www.bmvbs.de/pressemitteilung-,302.980291/Tiefensee-und-Glos-bringen-Ene.htm, downloaded 2006-23-11.
  5. Buxmann, P.; Känig, W. (1998): Das Standardisierungsproblem: Zur ökonomischen Auswahl von Standards in Informationssystemen, in: Wirtschaftsinformatik 402, p. 122–128.Google Scholar
  6. de Vos, A.; Widergren S. E.; Zhu, J. (2001): XML for CIM Model Exchange, in: Power Industry Computer Applications, 2001. PICA 2001. Innovative Computing for Power-Electric Energy Meets the Market. 22nd IEEE Power Engineering Society International Conference, IEEE Press.Google Scholar
  7. DIN ISO 9126 (1991): Informationstechnik-Beurteilen von Software-Produkten, Qualitätsmerkmale und Leitfaden zu deren Verwendung, Beuth Verlag, Berlin.Google Scholar
  8. EnEV-online (without year): http://software.enev-online.de/software/index.htm, downloaded 2006-11-26.Google Scholar
  9. Engel, P.; Hamscher, W.; Shuetrim, G.; vun Kannon, D.; Wallis, H. (2005): Extensible Business Reporting Language (XBRL) 2.1, http://www.xbrl.org/Specification/XBRLRECOMMENDATION-2003-12-31+Corrected-Errata-2005-11-07.htm, download in November 2006, pp. 13–17.
  10. Europe (2006a) (Anonymous): Transparency Initiative, http://www.euractiv.com/en/pa/transparency-initiative/article-140650, EurActiv, downloaded 2007-03-24.
  11. Europe (2006b) (Anonymous): Technical Harmonization, http://europa.eu/scadplus/leg/en/s06011.htm, downloaded 2007-04-06.Google Scholar
  12. Europe (2006c) (Anonymous): Green Paper ‘European Transparency Initative’, http://ec.europa.eu/commission_barroso/kallas/doc/eti_communication_20070321_en.pdf, downloaded 2007-04-06.Google Scholar
  13. Fraunhofer-Institut für Bauphysik (without year): http://www.ibp.fhg.de, downloaded 2006-29-11.
  14. Garbellotto, G.; Hannon, N. (005): Why XBRL Is a “Business” Reporting Language, in: Strategic Finance, May, pp. 57–61.Google Scholar
  15. Gebäudeenergiepass (2006): http://www.gebaeudeenergiepass.de/page/index.php?id=1632, downloaded 2006-11-20.
  16. Goodhand, M.; Hamscher, W (2004): Financial Reporting Instance Standard 1.0, XBRL International, http://xbrl.org/technical/guidance/FRIS-PWD-2004-11-14.zip, downloaded 2007-04-12.Google Scholar
  17. Guideline (2003): Richtlinie zur Gesamtenergieefizienz von Gebäuden, http://eurlex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/site/de/oj/2003/l_001/l_00120030104de00650071.pdf, in: Amtsblatt der europäischen Gemeinschaft 2003, downloaded 2006-11-28.Google Scholar
  18. Hamscher, W.; Goodhand, M.; Hoffmann, C.; Homer, B.; Macdonald, J.; Shuetrim, G.; Wallis, H. (2005): Financial Reporting Taxonomies Architecture 1.0, XBRL International, http://www.xbrl.org/technical/guidance/FRTA-RECOMMENDATION-2005-04-25+corrected-errata-2006-03-20.rtf, downloaded 2007-04-12.
  19. hAonghusa, C. O. (2005): The Journal Taxonomy, in: Accountancy Ireland, Vol. 37, No. 5, October, pp. 72–74.Google Scholar
  20. Hansen, H.R. (1997): Arbeitsbuch Wirtschaftsinformatik Lexikon, Aufgaben und Lösungen, At: Bea, F.X., Dichtl, E., Schweitzer, M. (Hrsg.): Grundwissen der Ökonomie. Lucius & Lucius, Stuttgart, p. 276.Google Scholar
  21. Heinrich, L.J.; Lehner, F. (2005): Informationsmanagement, R. Oldenbourg Verlag, München.Google Scholar
  22. Hoffmann, C. (2006): Financial Reporting Using XBRL: IFRS and US GAAP, Edition 1, Lulu, p. 16–45.Google Scholar
  23. International Accounting Standards Committee Foundation (2006): XBRL Fundamentals, http://www.iasb.org/XBRL/about_xbrl/fundamentals_xbrl.html, downloaded 2006-11-23.
  24. Kranich, P.; Schmitz, H. (2003): Die Extensible Business Reporting Language-Standard, Taxonomien und Entwicklungsperspektiven, in: Wirtschaftsinformatik, No. 45, pp. 77–80.Google Scholar
  25. König, W. (1997): zur Qualität und Durchsetzung von Standards — diskutiert am Beispiel von STEP, in: Wirtschaftsinformatik 391, p. 82–83.Google Scholar
  26. Krcmar, H. (2005): Informationsmanagement, 4th Edition, Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.Google Scholar
  27. Pelkman, J. (2006): European Integration Methods and Economic Analysis, Pearson Education, Harlow (England), p. 20 ff.Google Scholar
  28. Ramin, K. P.; Kesselmeyer B.; Ott S. (2006): XBRL im Internal Financial Reporting von Unternehmensgruppen, in: Zeitschrift für internationale und kapitalmarktorientierte Rechnungslegung, No. 3, http://www.kesselmeyer.com/blog/wp-conent/uploads/2006/03/XBRL%20Internal%20Financial%20Reporting%20KRSOBK%20060301%20Lang.pdf, downloaded 2007-04-12, pp. 1–14.Google Scholar
  29. Rechenkern zur DIN V 18599 (2006): http://www.ibp18599kernel.de/, downloaded 2006-11-28.
  30. ROWA-SoftGmbH, Lignadata GmbH (without year): http://rowagmbh.de/Daten/ErsteSchritte.pdf, downloaded 2006-11-26.Google Scholar
  31. Schlenker U. (1998): Datenmodellierung für das Data Warehouse-Vergleich und Bewertung konzeptioneller und logischer Methoden, http://www.ub.uni-konstanz.de/v13/volltexte/1999/187/pdf/187_1.pdf, p. 26, download in June 2006.
  32. Teixeira, A.; Hoffmann, C.; Macdonald, J. (2003): Taxonomy Mapping: The Process of Creating Extension Taxonomies, http://www.iasb.org/xbrl/images/xbrllab/past_projects/CreatingExtensionTaxonomiesDraft2003-03-24.pdf, downloaded 2006-11-26.
  33. Tochtermann, K.; Riekert, W.-F. (2001): Neue Methoden für das Wissensmanagement im Umweltschutz-4. Workshop des GI-Arbeitskreises Hypermedia im Umweltschutz und Workshop 3 der GI-Initiative Environmental Markup Language, Metropolis, Marburg.Google Scholar
  34. Wagenhofer, A.; Ewert, R. (2003): Externe Unternehmensrechung, Springer.Google Scholar
  35. Wallis, H. (2005a): FRTA 1.0 Conformance Suit, XBRL International, http://www.xbrl.org/technical/guidance/FRTA-CONF-RECOMMENDATION-2005-04-25.rtf, downloaded 2007-04-12.
  36. Wallis, H. (2005b): XBRL GL Instance Standards 1.0, XBRL International, http://www.xbrl.org/int/gl/2005-11-07/GLIS-CR-2005-11-07.rtf, downloaded 2007-04-12.
  37. Wallis, H. (2005c): GL Taxonomy Framework Technical Architecture 1.0, XBRL International, http://www.xbrl.org/int/gl/2005-11-07/GLTFTA-CR-2005-11-07.rtf, downloaded 2007-04-12.
  38. Weitzel, T.; Harder, T.; Buxmann, P. (2001): Electronic Business und EDI mit XML, 1. Aufl., dpunkt, Heidelberg.Google Scholar
  39. Wurster, Th. (2007): AmCham: Gemeinsame technische Standards in der EU und den USA würden Milliarden sparen /Wirtschaft unterstützt Merkels Vorstoür engere Kooperation, Tagesspiegel-Online.Google Scholar
  40. XBRL International (2005): XBRL GL 2005, http://www.xbrl.org/int/gl/2005-11-07/gl-2005-11-07.htm, downloaded 2007-04-12.
  41. XBRL International (2006a): XBRL’s History, http://www.xbrl.org/history.aspx, downloaded 2007-04-12.
  42. XBRL International (2006b): XBRL GL Key Features, http://www.xbrl.org/GLKeyFeatures/, downloaded 2007-04-12.

Copyright information

© Deutscher Universitäts-Verlag | GWV Fachverlage GmbH, Wiesbaden 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Maciej Piechocki
    • 1
  • André Gräning
    • 1
  • Harald Kienegger
    • 1
  1. 1.Technische Universität Bergakademie FreibergGermany

Personalised recommendations