--- title: 'XBRL is a complex standard, what does practice show?' url: 'https://www.digitect.nl/en/news/xbrl-is-een-complexe-standaard-wat-laat-de-praktijk-zien' markdown: 'https://www.digitect.nl/en/news/xbrl-is-een-complexe-standaard-wat-laat-de-praktijk-zien.md' lang: en date: '2017-05-05' description: 'XBRL is a complex standard, what does practice show? In February I attended an international conference that was entirely devoted to XBRL. With a diverse audience from several countries, we enthusiastically discussed XBRL as the standard for data exchange with the government. It was striking that …' --- # XBRL is a complex standard, what does practice show? ![Image](https://www.digitect.nl/user/pages/05.news/05.xbrl-is-een-complexe-standaard-wat-laat-de-praktijk-zien/Digitect-XBRL.jpg) **In February I attended an international conference that was entirely devoted to XBRL. With a diverse audience from several countries, we enthusiastically discussed XBRL as the standard for data exchange with the government. It was striking that most talks and discussions dwelt on the process around XBRL, and not on the technology and implementation of the standard. When XBRL is discussed, I often notice that in-depth knowledge is missing and that the conversation is not based on practice. Yet that conversation about practice and implementation is badly needed…** ## A business case from practice XBRL is the new (mandatory) standard for data exchange with the government, and it is a standard that is meant to be internationally uniform. At the XBRL conference I got talking to a fellow software supplier from Ireland. They had studied the XBRL standard in depth and tried to build an effective software solution for one of their customers to implement and use the standard. I spoke with one of the XBRL specialists of [Vizor Software](http://vizorsoftware.com)who told me: “Everyone says that XBRL is an international standard, but nowhere is there any qualification of how usable the standard is.” They tested its usability through their business case, and had to conclude that the XBRL standard is so complex that it becomes far too expensive to implement. Yet at the conference, and in the Netherlands too, the authorities keep stressing that XBRL is easy to implement. What is the reality: is it simple or complex? ## Complexity within the XBRL standard The business case of my Irish colleagues is a sign of the times. The XBRL standard offers a number of options. When these options are simple and stay the same over a longer period, it becomes easier to develop a standard software solution for practice. The problem is that since the standard was launched, new (complex) options and possibilities have been added every year. On top of that, the messages within the standard are renewed every year, even when their content does not change! This is what makes XBRL at its core so complex and expensive to implement. You cannot build a standard software solution for a standard that changes every year. That makes developing standard software impossible from the start. So XBRL needs an update every year, even if nothing changes. How could this be done better if you approach the issue from practice? ## Gains with standard messages The current XBRL standard was mainly designed by accountants. It would be better if the accountants limited themselves to defining the functional need, based on data models with business terminology. Turning that into a generic, well-functioning technical standard requires independent IT people who understand electronic message exchange. Looking at practice, we can gain an enormous amount if messages are created that stay the same for five to ten years. I believe this would make the standard a lot more workable and understandable. Let us define a solid foundation and first use it together for a number of years. Then many more organisations will be able to connect. It becomes financially feasible, because standard software solutions can be developed, and more expertise in the field of XBRL can be built up. Think, for example, of developing open source software and clear implementation examples that the government could make available. The government has the means to invest in developing knowledge about XBRL, but many of the organisations in the Netherlands that have to connect to the standard do not. There is a huge need for simplification and for affordable ways to implement XBRL. The government should therefore invest in developing in-depth knowledge about XBRL and in open source solutions for practice. --- ## Navigation - Parent: [News](https://www.digitect.nl/en/news.md) - Previous: [Development of the new EC-Design starts in 2017](https://www.digitect.nl/en/news/start-ontwikkeling-nieuwe-ec-design-in-2017.md) - Next: [Exchanging data according to the All Finance Data Catalogue (AFD)](https://www.digitect.nl/en/news/gegevens-uitwisselen-volgens-de-all-finance-datacatalogus-%28afd%29.md)