2012 03 basics of label and identifier

DHL Express, Global Business IT

Basics of Labeling and Identifying Transport Units

Martin Treder
March 2012

Agenda

 Current Situation: Labels and identifiers for transport Pieces

 Piece identifiers: Requirements and the Standard

 Transport labels: Standards, differences and the development

 The Multi Industry Transport Label (MITL) – a brief survey

 Existing solutions within the industry on the basis of the MITL

 Guidelines for an introduction of the MITL in a company

 The Label & Identifier Solution from DHL Express

Bonn, Germany | November 2008 – October 2011 Page 2

Introduction

The starting point for identifiers
 Companies in industry and trade increasingly use package identifiers as internal database
references. Target: You do not need to have all information on the package
 Each party involved may put own barcodes on the package that are of relevance for him
only.
 In addition, each carrier requires one or more specific piece or shipment identifiers. The
carrier cannot just process the senders’ identifiers instead – for obvious ambiguity reasons:
Two senders may have accidentally used the same number for their respective packages.
 As a result, cross-referencing is required between the sender’s identifier and the carrier’s
identifier. This imposes various issues or risks:
 Should one of the parties involved not be able to work on single package level (i.e.
only on shipment level), a unique cross-referencing is not possible at all.
 Cross-referencing requires additional database tables – usually for more than one
party. This increases the complexity of data management.
 Links often get lost – e.g. through data transmission problems or incomplete data
capture. In these cases, a huge part of a piece’s journey is lost to one or more
parties
 The ideal solution would be a globally standardised package numbering system that is
unanimous to all parties involved, without the need for previous bilateral agreements.


Introduction

The starting point for labels and barcodes
 Usually, each party involved in handling a package adds further labels, to accommodate for
own handling needs.
 Sometimes one party even adds several labels, e.g. a carrier with a non-integrated network,
or where multi-modal transport chains ask for changing information throughout the chain.
 Of course, there are a variety of different label formats, each being designed to meet its
users’ information needs.

 As a result, it is not clear, who has to
search where for the correct information
on the package.
 Often, labels even cover other labels
that are of relevance for the consignee
 In addition, there are a variety of
barcodes on many packages. How can
proper scanning of the correct barcodes
be granted – for both manual and
automated scanning processes?
 What would help? Ideally, a harmonised
structure for both labels and barcodes.


Agenda









Piece identifiers

What are the needs towards a feasible package identifier?
 Standard requirements towards a package identifier from industry and trade:

 Each package must be referenced by a unanimous identifier, from packing to
unpacking
 The structure of the identifier must be flexible, to meet a company‘s individual
demands. This includes “speaking” codes (containing codes for location, content
etc.) and non-sequential usage of identifiers.
 The identifier must be globally unique, to facilitate stable exchange of goods and
data with suppliers, customers and potential 3rd party suppliers.
 The identifier must be globally accepted, and there must be no competing
numbering systems
 Coding numbers into barcodes and transponders must be unanimously defined.

 Number administration must be stable and secure (like Internet domain
administration)


Piece Identifiers

The ISO standard: License Plate
 The development
 The License Plate standard has been approved in 1996 as a European standard
EN 1572.
 It became an international ISO/IEC standard 15459 in 1999.
 Since then the License Plate standard has been the only system to globally uniquely
allocate identifiers to packages.

ISO
Dun &
Bradstreet License
Unitrans
Plate (DHL)
... NATO GS1 SSCC VGL
(DHL)

Norsk
Odette
Edipro Siemens
UPU

IBM
TNT
Edifice
And many others – 40 organisations
(September 2012)


Piece identifiers

The ISO standard: License Plate General structure of a License Plate
 The structure
Data Identifier (ASC MH10 standard)
or Application Identifier (GS1 standard)
 Each License Plate starts with a unanimous
Issuing Agency code (IAC) Issuing Agency Code (ASC MH10)
or packaging identifier / number
 ISO has appointed the Dutch Standardisation extension (GS1 128 code list)

Institute (NEN) as Registration Authority One or more Sub-Issuing
Agency Codes* (ASC MH10)
or Company Prefix (GS1)
 Today, only international non-profit organisations
can become Issuing Agency. These organisations Serial number
Assigned by the
can allocate sub-ranges to other organisations or (Sub-)IAC

companies. Data IAC Sub-IAC Serial
Data IAC Sub-IAC Serial
 The ISO License Plate standard consists of two
distinct sub-standards:
ASC MH10: Alphanumeric License Plates,
consisting of up to 35 characters
GS1 SSCC: Numeric License Plates, always
exactly 18 digits long (including check digit) Example of an ASC MH10 License Plate
(issued by DHL Benelux, former VGL)
 License Plates are unambiguously marked as
* The Sub-IAC number is not mandatory
such in bar-coded form, using Data Identifiers or
Application Identifiers.


Piece identifiers

The ISO standard: License Plate
 What does the License Plate standard accomplish?

 Transport packages can obtain a unique number beyond company borders.

 Bilateral agreements or reference numbers are no longer necessary on piece
level.
 Huge number ranges are available via certain Issuing Agencies

 Existing proprietary numbering systems can be embedded in License Plate thus
becoming globally unique (perfect migration path)
 A License Plate stays with a package for the full logistics chain, without having
to be changed once.
 As far as carriers support License Plates, they do not have to allocate an
additional identifier for the transport process.
 Bar-coding of License Plates is precisely and unanimously specified. The same
applies to the storage of License Plates in RFID tags.
 Usually, License Plate ranges are cheap to obtain.


Agenda









Main Standards

Standards describing the Multi Industry Transport Label
 Several national and international standardization associations have described
standards for a label layout.
 The definition of the Multi Industry Standard Label took place in three major steps so
far:

ISO 15394
ANSI MH10.8
EN 1573 released published by ISO in Ongoing
released by ANSI in
by CEN in 1996 2000. Significantly maintenance...
1993
enhanced in 2010.


Main Standards

Standards describing the Multi Industry Transport Label
 What are the main differences between ANSI MH10.8, EN1573 and ISO 15394?
ANSI did only consider EAN128 and Code 39. Code 128 had not been described.
ANSI described Data Identifier and Application Identifier as well as their grade of
equivalency.
EN was intended as a rough guideline, to be specified by organizations that decided
to use it.
ISO is relatively restrictive and precise
ISO demands the License Plate barcode to be in the bottom section of the label
ISO defines the usage of the 2-dimensional barcode types MaxiCode and PDF417
(syntax to be used as described in ISO 15434); it also covers other ADC media.
 Outlook
Both EN1573 and ISO 15394 are supposed to be reviewed regularly.
The next release of EN 1573 will probably be closer to the current ISO standard.
However, it has not been modified since 1996 although a review period of 5 years
had been initially foreseen. The European Standardisation organisation CEN simply
does not see the need to add to the ISO standard.
 Recommendation
It is recommended to always refer to the ISO standard. It is the newest and most
precisely described standard.


Agenda









MITL short survey

Typical Attributes of the Multi Industry Transport Label (ISO 15394)
 Block Structure top-down
 fixed label width(s), variable length
 Well-defined barcode symbologies
(Code 128, GS1-128, MaxiCode, PDF417)
 Minimum requirements for a label where EDI is used in
parallel
 Data in linear barcodes to be coded using ASC MH10 Data
Identifiers or GS1 Application Identifiers
 Specification of plain text usage
 Specification of barcode quality
 It is recommended to use Symbology Identifier (ISO 15424)
for each barcode on a label, to easily distinguish between
different barcode types
 The License Plate barcode is always located in the last
segment on the label
Example: DHL Transport Label

The License Plate standard ISO 15459-1 recommends the usage
of this label standard (ISO 15394) for License Plate labeling.


Agenda









Industry Segment Standards

The ISO 15394 label became the basis for several industry standards
An increasing number of barcode standards developed for certain
segments or even single companies refer to the MITL definitions
 GS1 Logistics Label
This type of label keeps close to the ISO standard
Issue: only GS1 SSCC and Application Identifier foreseen
 HIBCC Supplier Labeling Standard
This type of label keeps close to the ISO standard
Both ASC MH10 and GS1 identification foreseen
Restricted content; License Plate refers to EDI data
 Global Transport Label Standard for the Automotive Industry
(Odette, AIAG, JAMA, JAPIA)
Uses MITL standards as a rough guideline only
Bases on Data Identifiers and ASC MH10 License Plate Example: HIBCC Label with Data Identifiers
(from “HIBC Supplier Labeling Standard”)

 IATA 606 label
No explicit reference to MITL, but guidelines have been followed
waybill no. barcode mandatory, piece identifier (UPID) still optional
piece identifier not yet restricted to License Plate (recommendation only)
 and many more (Siemens Norm SN 18630-4, EDIFICE Shipment Label, FIATA
label, DHL Express Transport Label v2.6/v3.1...)

Agenda









Guidelines for the usage of the MITL

MITL guidelines: a) Label layout
 Label width
Choose a fixed label width.
If piece size and the amount of data on the labeI allow, decide for the narrow width of
105 mm (A6 width) or 4”, respectively. (This width is supported by most thermo direct /
thermo transfer printers.)
 Label length
Principally, the length can be variable, depending on information to be stored on label.
However, a fixed length can save money. Pre-cut label material allows for higher label
dispensing speed (no cut-off mechanism); printer hardware / maintenance is cheaper.
Anyway, segments should be foreseen to be filled with carrier-specific information.
The size A6 (or 4” times 6”, respectively) is the cheapest alternative. It is a standard
size for thermo label rolls.Laser printers can use A4 sheets with 4 A6 labels on it
In case of varying label content more than one label per piece could be printed, to
allow for a fixed label length anyhow.
 Print direction
The label should be printed in portrait mode, to allow for a smaller print head
Barcodes should be printed in picket fence format rather than in ladder format. This
allows for faster printing and increases the lifetime of a print head (less changes
between “hot” and “cold”)



MITL guidelines: b) Data Identifiers (DI) / Application Identifiers (AI)
 If possible, avoid barcode usage without Data/Application Identifier.
 Define a precise standard or adopt an existing one.
 Take care that official License Plate numbers are available to all participants.
Introduction of GS1 SSCC can often go along with the introduction of ILNs
ASC MH10 License Plates are available via international industry bodies that
have become issuing agents
Dun&Bradstreet also issues ASC MH10 License Plates (UN...)
DHL Express can also issue License Plate ranges to customers

 A combination of ASC MH10
Data Identifiers and GS1
Application Identifiers is no
problem unless content is not
properly defined.
 However, do not forget to
implement the operative support
for both Identifier types, so that
exchange with the “rest of the
world” is not restricted
Example: Label in computer industry (IBM)



MITL guidelines: b) Data Identifiers (DI) / Application Identifiers (AI)
Business partners using both EAN/UCC AIs and ASC MH10 DIs
GS1
EAN/UCC AIs
GS1 Mapping Tables
ASC MH10 DIs

Specific in General in
nature. Mainly nature. Mainly
used in trade used in
orientated manufacturing
processes. orientated
processes.

The data exchange between partners of both groups requires a conversion from
one identifier system to the other. For this purpose you need mappings.
The identifier systems have differing features

restricted Number of info-elements large
strict Limitations, definitions lenient
some Overlap of the info-elements many
less Opportunity to differentiate info high
= business partner

There areare aof EAN/UCC AIs and ASC MH10 DIs which have no direct equivalent in the
There a lot lot of GS1
other system or at best one with similar meaning.



MITL guidelines: c) License Plate handling

 License Plate re-usage
The standard defines the minimum period before re-
using a License Plate as “until a sufficient period of
time has passed so that the first number has ceased to
be of significance [...]”.
The ISO standard would obviously allow for shorter
cycles, e.g. for cut flowers. This, however, may lead to
problems in co-operation with other companies (and
their IT systems...)
Thus, License Plates should not be reused for different
units within 12 months after the old unit has ceased to
exist. This has become a common (yet not formal!)
business rule.
Software that is meant to be able to process 3rd party
License Plates should always be prepared to process
any License Plate immediately again.



MITL guidelines: c) License Plate handling
 Duration of License Plate allocation to an piece

This should be strictly defined: Is the License Plate valid for one single transport
process only? Does it include possible returns? Can it be used again and again as
long as the allocated piece is kept closed?
General definition: A transport piece may – yet does not have to – keep its License
Plate number as long as it remains closed.
To obviate any problem of ambiguity, a clear distinction between a transport
process number (Shipment number or Waybill number) and an piece number
(License Plate) is necessary.
One single License Plate may belong to several shipments - but not at the same
time!

5. First transport: identifier known to sender
1234
..
CLOSED
CLOSED
?? Return: different identifier?
4567
8.
..



MITL guidelines: d) Type of License Plate

 Decide for GS1 SSCC if...
...you need only a relatively small number range
…you do not need to keep your existing identifiers
...you want to process barcodes/identifiers with a fixed length
...you are working with ILNs, or you intend to do so soon
...you often have other barcodes on Pieces and need a “waterproof” distinction tool (unique
Symbology Identifier for GS1-128)
...you use standard software that is prepared to process GS1 SSCC as a standard entity
...you want to have a guaranteed maximum barcode width (with given x-dimension)
...the majority of your business partners works with GS1 Application Identifiers



MITL guidelines: d) Type of License Plate
 Decide for ASC MH10 License Plate if...
...you need flexibility in coding strings (digits and characters, different lengths, etc.)
...you want to embed your existing proprietary numbering system in License Plate strings (easy
migration)
...you do not want to pay too much fee (check whether you are member of an international
industry body that owns an Issuing Agency Code)
...you want to use License Plates in the context of a complete system of Data Identifiers,
including full support of in-house processes (several ASC MH10 DIs do not yet have a GS1
counterpart)
...you have to or want to lavishly issue License Plates
...The majority of your business partners works with ASC MH10 Data Identifiers
...you need the same cost conditions for License Plate usage in various countries
...you want to have minimum ambiguity beyond barcoding (Issuing Agency Codes for validation)
...you are a non-profit organization with worldwide presence ( You can apply for your own
IAC!)
...you need few numbers AND a very short code ( You can determine the length yourself)



MITL guidelines: e) Types of barcodes
 Code 128
This code is the standard symbology for ASC MH10 License Plates
 Code 39
This code is also allowed for ASC MH10 License Plates. However, it should
not be used in new applications. It has been included for backward
compatibility only. Its usage is strictly not recommended.
 GS1-128 (former EAN128)
This is the only allowed barcode symbology for GS1 SSCCs. It needs to be
used in conjunction with GS1 Application Identifiers only.
 Further types of barcodes
There may be specific advantages to some other barcodes. However,
almost all kinds of identifiers can be stored in Code 128 or EAN128
sufficiently.
Whenever complex character sets have to be encoded, other barcodes have
to be considered, e.g.
 for Unicode: barcode symbology 93 i (in WORD mode)
or QR Code (2-dimensional)
 for full EBCDIC: Data Matrix code (2-dimensional)

Sample Data Matrix code



MITL guidelines: e) Communication sender/receiver

 Transmission of data to partners in logistic chain
The flexible structure of the MITL allows for data coding
to different addressees (carrier, consignee, warehouse,
assembly line, ...)
Mutual agreements should always refer to ISO 15394
Information for different addressees should be coded in
separate blocks (but do not necessarily have to). Clipping from Label & Identifier
 2D barcodes: Different symbologies of DHL Express:
The DataMatrix code contains
Being a stacked linear code, PDF417 does not require the full transport order

expensive camera systems. Its rectangular format fits PDF417
perfectly with the block-structure of MITL.
MaxiCode is a proprietary code and should not be used
DataMatrix is a very modern and effective symbology
 Use Data/Application identifiers in barcodes
Agree on communication using well-defined
Data-/Application Identifiers. Let ISO 15434 define the
format.
 Avoid further linear barcode types
depending on License Plate type, only Code128 or GS1-
MaxiCode
128 should be chosen for bar-coded data transmission.


MITL guidelines: f) Automated sorting of Pieces

 When designing barcodes for automated sorting systems, three different strategies can be
distinguished. Consider the following pros and cons:

Bar-coded target information (e.g. warehouse code or shelf number in barcode)
 No additional data is necessary
 Identical content of barcode and plain text sorting information
 Target information has to be known already when printing the label

Sorting via identifier (License Plate) only, taking target information from
databases
 Flexibility to change routing after label printout
 Piece cannot be moved if data is not available

Bar-coded “raw data”, preferably together with official Data/Application
Identifiers
 raw data could be postcode or customer number
 This solution provides the flexibility to change routing after label printout
 Piece-specific data is not needed to sort piece (only general tables)

 Usually, the third alternative is recommended, as it is a good compromise
 This is also the choice of major express carriers, including DHL Express.


MITL guidelines: g) Manual sorting of Pieces

 When designing barcodes for manual sorting systems, there are basically two different
approaches, having the following advantages and disadvantages:

Plain text/symbols on the label, indicating the target (and/or the route to this
target)
 Identical content of barcode and plain text sorting information
 Fast to process (if printed in a big font)
 When the label is printed by a third party (supplier or
customer), he has to know the delivery location
 Data may be outdated when sorting. Example of a manual sorting
segment in a multi industry
transport label (DHL Express)

Using bar-coded information only, in conjunction with a mobile scanner.
 This works in conjunction with the sorting barcode (see previous page).
 Mobile scanners can always store most recent sorting tables.
 Depending on the barcode structure, access to tables is required (piece
specific or general).
 This may slow down the process significantly, especially for small boxes.

 No general recommendation. Both methods may be appropriate, depending on
environment.



MITL guidelines: h) RFID and Multi Industry Transport Label?
 RFID (Transponder) usage has not yet been considered explicitly in ISO’s MITL standard. It is
meant, though, where the License Plate standard speaks about “other ADC media”.
 However, a combined approach is already possible today: Combined thermo-printers/RFID
coding units can print MITL on a label while coding a passive transponder that is incorporated
in that label. This shows a migration approach also.
 As with 2-dimensional barcodes, the unique piece identifier (License Plate) should in any
case be printed on the label in addition in the traditional way both in plain text and as
barcode.
 RFID does not necessarily have to be used by all partners in a logistic chain. It may be a
means of communication between sender and the receiver’s assembly line. All partners in-
between (warehouse, forwarders, ...) may simply ignore it and work on the basis of the visible
part of the label.

Source: EHAG,
Switzerland



MITL guidelines: h) RFID and Multi Industry Transport Label?
 RFID offers principally the same applications as a 2D barcode: It could serve as a
backup for (or even a replacement of) EDI, it ensures that data and piece cannot go
different ways.
 Beyond that, it allows for a more flexible way of reading, it can often be updated.
 On the other hand side it is still more expensive (transponders, [de-]coding devices
and know-how), which prevents it from being used in cheap mass transport business
(such as ordinary letter or parcel business).
 Misuse of tags (accidentally or on purpose) has to be addressed. Examples are
Re-usage of boxes with old but readable transponders (mixing up with current)
Copying or faking of transponders (where connected to payment, “ticketing
applications”)
Decoding through unauthorized personnel (e.g. through a lorry plane)
Unsuccessful writing (can only be detected reliably by systematic “read after
write”)
Manipulation of content during usage
 Active transponder may play an important role in high-value transport business, but
(for the time being) cannot be attached to Pieces from outside (or even incorporated in
labels) due to their size and/or costs.


Agenda









The Label & Identifier solution from DHL Express

What do transport companies offer you today?
(1) Basic: Usage of Customer Reference Codes
 Disadvantages:
 Link must be created with a certain effort: Either through combined scanning of carrier
barcode and sender barcode (error-prone) or through data transfer from sender to
carrier (error-prone, as well)
 Carrier databases often archive the own identifiers only; reference codes are discarded.

(2) Next step: Some carriers support only some License Plates (often GS1 SSCC)
 Disadvantages:
 No full support of ISO 15459
 Where ASC MH10-LP are used by sender, they have to be added (or replaced!) by GS1
SSCC. This violates the ISO standard and keeps out full industry segments
(3) The approach of DHL Express is a comprehensive one
 Full support of ISO 15459: All ASC MH10 and GS1 License Plates are accepted
 All customers’ ISO License Plates can be used with all DHL Express products
 No additional DHL-specific identifier is required any more! (Customers’ reference codes
remain possible, of course)
 Label layout follows ISO standard, including sufficient space for customer information
 DHL Express offers a plug-in to customers called Global Label Service (GLS). This tool
renders DHL labels automatically, including the determination of handling codes
required by DHL. Even joint customer/DHL labels are possible.

The two purposes of the DHL Express Transport label

What is the Global
Label NOT?

The Global Label is
Identification • NO legal document
“Who am I”
• no waybill
• no Bill of Lading
• no proforma invoice
• no customs info etc
• no marketing tool

Use instead:
Handling Support
“How to get me from A to B” • Multiply Waybill
(to be migrated to eCom!)
• EDI transmission
• Separate pouch with
customs docs
• Separate marketing stickers


Task 1: Identification

Key Innovation in Piece-Level Identification

What were our targets for the introduction of piece identification?
 Catch up with competition: Allow customers to track on package level (not only on
shipment level)
 Offer more than our competitors: Process customers’ own piece identifiers.
But how to ensure unambiguous piece identification…?
 Choose a worldwide unique and accepted identifier, based on global standards!

SOLUTION:
 DHL has decided to use ISO License Plate as piece identifiers
 Those identifiers are globally unique (like IP addresses)
 Trade and industry have been using License Plates as piece
identifiers internally for several years
 Packages can retain their identity, even in multi-modal
transport chains
 The License Plates specifies the package – not the transport
process. (Consequence: If the package is sent twice within a
week, the same identifier appears in two different shipments!)


Task 1: Identification

We support all ISO License Plates. This has an impact on working with customers
 Where a customer uses his own License Plate, DHL needs to know, as we must not add a
DHL License Plate. This would result in two different LPs on the same package.
 This is not supported by the ISO standard and leads to ambiguity. Checkpoints would be
missing. Auto sorters would reject such pieces as they don’t know which of the two LPs to take

How do we work with our customers?
 We ask our customers whether they
already use ISO License Plates.
 Sometimes they don’t know so DHL
may ask the customer for a check.
 The example on the right side shows
such a valid LP. DHL will scan it when
it enters the network – and use it!
 The customer should send own LP in
the EDI message as well.
 No other scannable LP barcode should
be on a package. This is in the interest
of both DHL and the customer

Task 2: Handling Support

The Global Label needs to support manual handling and automated sorting

How does the DHL Transport Label support
 automated sorting (parcels / flyers)?
 manual sorting (pallets, in small facilities)?

Realisation:
The label has to contain both kinds of information:
 human-readable information
 for manual sorting
 Allows DHL to sort depending on origin, destination and product

 bar-coded information
 The routing code contains all sorting relevant information:
destination country/postcode and product information
 Transport data is often not required earlier than in delivery facility
 Less problems caused by missing data in hubs and gateways
 Faster scanning and sorting possible (no database access)
 Linehaul plans can change at any time, without impact on
automated sorting

Target: No need to re-print the label during the transport


Our solution for customers: A shared service that does it!

How can a customer print a DHL Label? Our Global Label Service (GLS) takes care!
GLS consists of a Data Lookup Service (GLSdata) and a Label Creation Service (GLSprint)

 GLSdata has been available as GLS 1.0 since 2009. This service already allows a customer to
print fully compliant Transport Labels, as it determines all mandatory fields on the label.
 GLSprint was added in GLS v.2.0, released in 2011. It creates ready-to-print labels. This takes
further effort away from our customers.

 This Data Lookup Service has been implemented as "Global Label Service v1".

 It determines required Handling and Sort Codes based on DHL’s official, centrally
GLSdata maintained Reference Data
 The online version directly works with a reference database in the DHL backend.
The offline version uses a locally replicated copy of the relevant data

 The Label Creation Service was added with "Global Label Service v2".

GLSprint
 Different label types and native printer support were added

 GLS v2 has become the solution of choice particularly for eCom solutions, 3rd
party solutions and self-programming customers.


Our solution for customers: A shared service that does it!

What is new in GLS 3.0, coming in Q3/2012?
• GLS 2 already supports online rendering of standard labels and limited offline data lookup. This
solution has already enabled several customers and DHL tools to print valid Transport Labels.
• GLS 3.0 will allow ALL customers and DHL applications to print valid labels, by providing:
 An enhanced offline service for full label rendering without a permanent online connection
• The local database is updated once per day, usually while shipment data is transmitted
 An enhanced rendering solution, flexible enough to support all customers' label needs.
• This solution covers all Global SOP labels, but also non-standard domestic labels as well as any other
documents. Only a template is required, to tell GLS what to print where on a page.
 Facility Lookup based on Postal Location and Product.
• This capability is required to print the correct destination codes on labels.
 Rendering Flexibility
• It will be possible to print non-Latin characters such as Chinese and Cyrillic. Images and barcodes are
supported as well. This includes customer-owned information

Why are we doing GLS 3.0?
• Our primary driver is to simplify and accelerate customer onboarding.
• Correct customer labeling is a precondition to reduce relabeling at our facilities. GLS 3 allows us to
achieve this as it allows our customers to print the final label.
• Many of our customers want to add own information to the DHL label, to avoid the need for a second
label. DHL encourages customers to do so, GLS 3.0 supports all label variants


The Label & Identifier solution
Global Label Service

What’s in it for our customer?
GLS The three Dimensions of GLS
Let the service do the work!

COSTS QUALITY SPEED

Initial implementation: Less Errors Fast Implementation
• GLS is easily installed under • Label content is error-prone • Need to print labels? You only
Windows and Linux, offering • We don’t want the customer to need the GLS interface
an installation Wizard. understand DHL’s coding logic • No printing and barcode
• Installation routines for any just to be able to print labels knowledge is required
other platform that supports • With GLS, we get customer • Less testing for customers
Java will be supported on labels error-free
request Quick future changes
Complete Labels • Data changes: Configuration!
Future changes • GLS labels don’t need • Layout changes: Just templates
• When the label needs to relabeling in DHL Facilities
change, only GLS has to be • The original customer label Faster Transport
replaced – in most cases even remains visible and can be used • Impreoved DHL handling
only a template for customer information as well • No time lost to relabeling


The Label & Identifier solution
Some Interesting Examples of Global Labels

.
A) Label with customer-owned B) In preparation: Label C) Labels from other
information and License Plate with 2-dimensional code DP DHL Business Units –
(as an alternative to EDI) following the same standard!


2012 03 basics of label and identifier

Recomendados

Recomendados

Más contenido relacionado

La actualidad más candente

La actualidad más candente (20)

Destacado

Destacado (6)

Similar a 2012 03 basics of label and identifier

Similar a 2012 03 basics of label and identifier (20)

2012 03 basics of label and identifier

Notas del editor