I trust that discourse in this group WILL be kept civil as it always has in the past. Let's keep away from the ad hominem attacks, shall we?
I'm on vacation this week, I don't want to have to deal with a flamewar. Peace on Earth and all that. -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]on Behalf Of Adam West Sent: Sunday, December 28, 2008 6:21 PM To: Michael Mattias/LS Cc: [email protected] Subject: Re: [EDI-L] the Big 3 - 810, 850, 856 I am attempting to have a discussion on EDI topics, I am not sure if you are drunk over the weekends, then go to an AA meeting. If you enjoy mindlessly insulting a person who wishes to engage in a discussion on EDI, you are in need of therapy for your misery. I asked what are the sort of issues that have existed in your experience. If you have nothing to post then don't post next time. Adam West ________________________________ From: Michael Mattias/LS <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Sunday, December 28, 2008 10:33:06 AM Subject: Re: [EDI-L] the Big 3 - 810, 850, 856 > What are some of the typical issues you are seeing with the 856? At my > current job, they do work pretty well, as opposed to the 850's. Huh? The 850 Purchase Order is typically produced by the BUYER and processed by the SELLER; the roles are reversed for the 856 Advance Shipping Manifest. I don't see how there can be a valid comparison of "how well they work," since they serve two totally different functions for two totally different parties. BTW for those who suggested my list of the "Big <number> EDI Documents" was lacking: The 812 and 820 are pretty much 'industry-agnostic' and the point I was trying to make is that the 'key' or 'most-used' EDI documents DO vary by industry. Then again, for years I've been harping on the concept that to 'do' EDI well, you must understand the industry in which you are currently working. Perhaps that concept is now outmoded? (Not that I'll agree with you). Specific industry aside, in this question we see a lack of understanding of the function of these two documents - or poor communications skills - at work. Oh, well, either deficiency is on The Fast Road to Failure so I guess it doesn't really matter which, does it? Michael C. Mattias Tal Systems Inc. Racine WI mmatt...@talsystems .com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] ------------------------------------ ... Please use the following Message Identifiers as your subject prefix: <SALES>, <JOBS>, <LIST>, <TECH>, <MISC>, <EVENT>, <OFF-TOPIC> Job postings are welcome, but for job postings or requests for work: <JOBS> IS REQUIRED in the subject line as a prefix.Yahoo! Groups Links ------------------------------------ ... Please use the following Message Identifiers as your subject prefix: <SALES>, <JOBS>, <LIST>, <TECH>, <MISC>, <EVENT>, <OFF-TOPIC> Job postings are welcome, but for job postings or requests for work: <JOBS> IS REQUIRED in the subject line as a prefix.Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EDI-L/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EDI-L/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: mailto:[email protected] mailto:[email protected] <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [email protected] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
