Hi,
Chris Johnson wrote:
> One which was an accepted, maintained, international standard.
Jonathan Allen wrote:
>Happily, there is one close to hand: IMPDEF, the UN/EDIFACT ...
What do you think about 5 reasons to take s.th based on Microsoft BizTalk's
script format?
1. It is XML
2. It is independend from specific syntaxes like EDIFACT, X12, TRADACOMS,
VDA, etc.
3. Has broader concept then everything known (covers Source Format AND
Mapping AND Target Format)
4. It comes from a recognized industrial leader -> good chance to be widely
accepted
5. The format specs are DIN 16557-5 compliant, which is going to become ISO
standard
Admitingly some refinements would be needed. I think Chris Johnson would
prefer s.th. like "%buyer_tech_faxno" as Mapping-Identifier instead of s.th
like "14". Others might whish to take their companies' or branches' BSUs as
identifiying item.
DIN 16557-5 describes rules how to take the semantics ( the implicitely
contained data model ) out of EDI MIGs to bring it into XML syntax. It was
developed by vendors and customers here in Germany, who do not want to
reinvent the wheel nor to waste time and money to discuss and implement
things which are already solved when standards like EANCOM were created and
implemented. This standard draft is presently in the ISO fast track
procedure and has good chance to become international standard because it
seems to have strong support by multinationals, which have EC scenarios like
this:
"A leading supplier of specialty chemicals and laboratory equipment
electronically markets some 350,000 products in two ways: bulk buyers, who
generally have their own order processing systems, can order by means of an
EDIFACT ORDERS message. Customers such as universities, laboratories and
research facilities can place orders through the World Wide Web. All
incoming orders are ultimately processed by the same order handling system,
SAP R/3 SD. Whether EDIFACT or XML, every order must contain elementary data
such as order number, order date, customer number, supplier number, part
number and quantity. The more similar the two formats are in structure, the
simpler it is to import them into the in-house system. After all, the
in-house system defines the same format and value set restrictions (such as
currency codes, Incoterms) for the order fields."
Best regards,
Frank Dreisch
www.gefeg.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jonathan Allen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2001 11:29 AM
Subject: Re: EDI mapping tool
Chris Johnson said:
>
> One which was an accepted, maintained, international standard.
Of course, it would work best if its content was also an accepted,
maintained, international standard. Happily, there is one close
to hand: IMPDEF, the UN/EDIFACT standard message for describing
implementation conventions/message implementation guides.
Jonathan
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
Jonathan Allen | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Voice:
01404-823670
Barum Computer Consultants | | Fax:
01404-823671
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
=======================================================================
To contact the list owner: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Archives at http://www.mail-archive.com/edi-l%40listserv.ucop.edu/
=======================================================================
To contact the list owner: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Archives at http://www.mail-archive.com/edi-l%40listserv.ucop.edu/
