On 22/11/11 14:20 +0100, Jan Grasnick | grasbauer ug wrote: > Am 22.11.2011 12:26, schrieb Sharoon Thomas: > >On Nov 22, 2011, at 3:25 PM, Tobias Paepke wrote: > >> > >>having one standard EDI protocol will not fit the real world. > >> > > > >+1 > > > >I think so too. > Like Tobias said: EDIFACT is a widely used standard - but with a > huge amount of special subsets for different industries.
Yes it looks like UN/EDIFACT is widespread. I found the syntax standard [1] and the vocabulary [2]. There is a message for Invoice [3], Purchase [4] and Sale [5]. > A lot of companies are changing right now from OFTP to TCP/IP. A > customer of our client has been working with OFTP by now. We decided > not to do investments in hardware for this old-fashioned way. That's the transmission protocol but I don't think we have to care about it. > If I understand right, the only common standard is the naming of the > service-messages. Not sure as they are converters, I think they share some vocabulary. [1] http://www.gefeg.com/jswg/v41/data/v41_docs.htm [2] http://www.stylusstudio.com/edifact/frames.htm [3] http://www.stylusstudio.com/edifact/d96a/INVOIC.htm [4] http://www.stylusstudio.com/edifact/D96A/ORDERS.htm [5] http://www.stylusstudio.com/edifact/D96A/ORDRSP.htm -- Cédric Krier B2CK SPRL Rue de Rotterdam, 4 4000 Liège Belgium Tel: +32 472 54 46 59 Email/Jabber: [email protected] Website: http://www.b2ck.com/
pgpyhe49IQWlu.pgp
Description: PGP signature
