Quoted text is from <[email protected]>, by Leah Halpin <[email protected]>
Leah My previous response was a general one in favour of applying a 'fix' for a problem which had occurred, even if it seemed unlikely to be a regular occurrence. The 'fix', however, might not necessarily be what management favour. In general, though the range of problems is vast, I prefer to have the EDI system put a temporary hold on data which seems suspect whilst it complains loudly (email. SMS, net message, popup) in an effort to get some human intervention. Unfortunately this may not always be available, so after an installation specific period the data is allowed through (again with notifications given). There are still complaints, but it seems to be the best of a bad job. >Mostly, I'm a little frustrated with so many responses focusing on the >translator as the issue and how to "fix" that. I like to think we're a >more enlightened and experienced bunch, looking at the big picture. In >my experience, managers, at least the non-techies, want the fast and >easy fix, without thinking through the ramifications to the business. >I feel it's our responsibility, as professionals, to guide our >management into making considered, and rational, and hopefully wise, >decisions. That touches on a very sore point for me. I sincerely believe that you should have no business logic in an EDI system. Business logic belongs to the application, which is (hopefully) built for the purpose and provides the user interface to business data and processes. Nevertheless the majority of amendments and developments I am asked to make to an installed system involve just that; using the EDI system to apply business rules which are sometimes complex. I always say that they do not belong there. The response is almost invariably that changing the application will be time consuming, expensive, and involve significant delays, whereas I have admitted that it could be done in the EDI system, and the costs and time scale would be less, so please get on with it. Should I stand on principle and get involved in a demarcation dispute, or try to keep my clients business running and perform the implementation, even though it is not what should happen? Regards Chris -- Chris Johnson mobile:+44 (0)7785 302122 Fax: +44 (0)870 0519 818 EDI website http://www.edimatrix.co.uk EDIMatrix Ltd work: 0845 126 0680 or +44 20 8778 1402 Registered in UK no. 2777624 Reg.Office: 34 Sydenham Rd, London SE26 5QF ------------------------------------ ... 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: [email protected] [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/
