Leah’s points are on the mark In the old days when I was implementing EDI in a mainframe environment we elected to use the system time registry for control numbers since we were operating in a real time mode. We used the higher time registers (HHMM) for the ISA and HHMMSS) for GS and then HHMMSSSS for the ST since it was not unusual for our system to generate multiple ST/SE in the same second.
Rachel Foerster 847-872-8070 From: EDI-L@yahoogroups.com [mailto:EDI-L@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Leah Halpin Sent: Monday, September 23, 2013 8:49 AM To: vincent samuel; EDI-L@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [EDI-L] Tech question about Control number Because your trading partner will have their own ideas and in the real world one must work with trading partners while attempting to educate them rather than butting one's head against the wall. Also, just because a field is alphanumeric it does not mean that only alpha or only numeric characters must be used, it simply means that both are allowed. Therefore, a string of numbers only is just as valid as a string of alpha characters or a string of both. Since the purpose of the ST control number (in my opinion) is to indicate position in the GS as well as "count" them, numeric makes the most sense to my human brain. Alpha would work ok up to 26, but then one would either need to start adding numbers or AA, AB, AC or would it be AA, BA, CA? And, would AA come after Z or would my translator somehow put AA after A and then B? You see the point here, once you get outside the "box" of straight numbering, there are too many variables for easy integration. Having said this, I don't know any translator that would automatically check for sequence in ST control numbers and a person could figure it out, as this would likely only be done in the case of an error. In that case, why make it harder on your TP? Pretty much everyone uses Arabic numbers and can count, if they're in this business. I have seen trading partners use a numeric format of the ISA or GS control number followed by 0001, 0002, etc as the ST/SE control numbers and I have seen other numeric permutations used. I've also seen alpha characters in GS control numbers, but not yet in ST/SE. Unless you count spaces, which you should, as they're technically "alpha". IMHO any decent translator should be able to deal with ST*856* 1' for example and not require ST*856*0001', although I have run into issues with that before, as well. Leah _____ From: vincent samuel <crazyvin...@yahoo.com <mailto:crazyvin...@yahoo.com> > To: "EDI-L@yahoogroups.com <mailto:EDI-L@yahoogroups.com> " <EDI-L@yahoogroups.com <mailto:EDI-L@yahoogroups.com> > Sent: Monday, September 23, 2013 12:21 AM Subject: Re: [EDI-L] Tech question about Control number Why dont you just follow what the standards say - numeric or alphanumeric?