From a design perspective, my preference would be to have a good
separation of concern. Something like:
1. MCA triggers service call
2. Service pre-parses mail - drops obvious rejects
3. Service forwards mail to a processing chain:
Pre-Parsed Mail -> Fedex Processor -> UPS Processor -> Import Processor
-> etc.
The disadvantage to having the parsing done in the MCA XML code is you
end up cross-cutting code (spaghetti code). For example, Fedex-specific
code would be in your Fedex process AND in the MCA XML code. It would be
better to keep all Fedex code in one place.
-Adrian
BJ Freeman wrote:
if you look at the msg about checking for duplicates in the user ML you
can see that any thing that will take longer will eventually clogs the
system.
Most of my clients have hundreds of emails from shippers
(fulfillment/dropshippers) and suppliers about status of drop ship
inventory.
So I would like to make the process as efficient as possible but having
the mca get to the correct parsing.
BJ Freeman sent the following on 9/30/2008 1:23 PM:
routines are in java. and meant to parse the email. they never get put
in the communications event.
Adrian Crum sent the following on 9/30/2008 1:13 PM:
What are the processes written in? Are they services? If yes, then you
could set up a service group and have the email go from service to
service - each service acting on the email accordingly.
-Adrian
BJ Freeman wrote:
thanks
but I have many processes that are based on the email subject and or
sender. Fedex notification, UPS Notifications, Order of different formats
Import routies, etc.
would like to do this in the mca so I don't have to write this in java
code then do the same thing.
Adrian Crum sent the following on 9/30/2008 12:47 PM:
The way I handled it here was to have a simpler condition that sent the
email into a processor that did additional evaluations on the email.
-Adrian
BJ Freeman wrote:
if seemed pretty simple to add the conditionals.
but looking a the decision tree it looks like is an or'ed condition.
if I have two condition for the same header or field and one of them is
true then they will all be true.
The question is, is expanding the conditions to accept and and or
condition acceptable. this would include a grouping of each condition
like in an If statement.
rationale:
a lot of emails have parts of a field or header that needs to be looked
at. for instance
subject: order #13950 from yst-1309
to parse you want
[contain order
and
contain yst]
or
not-contain Re:
BTW any hints on how to define a group of condition in the xsd would
help.
