Message text written by Doug Anderson
>
Not sure that the "T vs. P" is a VAN thing however. Remember that in the
beginning (gee all the way back to the early days of TDCC, I am dating
myself) we didn't use headers above the GS in EDI and us VANs moved the
data
right along. Also, the first header, the BG/EG didn't have the test vs.
production indicator and we still move a lot of data using that header
today. So, it sure doesn't sound like a "goofy VAN problem" to me. But it
is in vogue to blame everything on a VAN.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Doug,
Had to push your buttons on this one of course ; - )
Actually the combination should work here. Remember - some smaller
TP's are going to look at you all nuts if you start talking about test and
prod' indicators - so in that case you'll want to use profiles. Also in
EDI
you are used to a 856 say, but nothing to stop you putting a version
code into the trans header as you noted -> <PO_trans ver="1.7"> etc.
In ebXML the transport header there is tons of room
to do all this anyway. You have verbs and qualifiers - so I'm sure the
T&R WG can give you plenty of usable stuff.
In fact I'm sure they would be delighted if you want to grab the latest
spec's from ebXML.org and actually implement one of their envelops
and try it.
That's exactly the point here!
Let me know if you need more - but once you're on the T&R WG area
you should find a draft for download there.
Thanks and enjoy!
DW.
------ XML/edi Group Discussion List ------
Homepage http://www.XMLedi-Group.org
Unsubscribe send email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Leave the subject and body of the message blank
Questions/requests: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To receive only one message per day (digest format)
send the following message to [EMAIL PROTECTED],
(leave the subject line blank)
digest xmledi-group your-email-address
To join the XML/edi Group complete the form located at:
http://www.xmledi-group.org/xmledigroup/mail1.htm
