|
[EDI-L Mailing List Archive Home]
[Message List]
[Reply To This Message]
EAI or lower-case EDI ; was "XML Hierarchy Question"
Bryce, thanks for your post. You didn't say whether these files were
intended to be sent out of house, or were for internal consumption. The
former would be a perfect example of lower-case "EDI" (even if not
EDIFACT or X12); the latter is strictly EAI, and while an interesting
problem, not completely germane to the list since the data would not be
"outward-facing."
If these files were lower-case "EDI", can you share with the group what
sort of applications they comprised? e.g., oil drilling geologic data or
toxicological reporting. Actually, if you have an xmlLinguist use case
or "success" story pertaining to lower-case "EDI", that would be an
excellent discussion starting point on EDI-L. Sometimes folks think the
only data that any company would ever exchange with another would be POs
or Dispatch Advices! The more real-world examples we had, which were
not covered by the existing X12 or EDIFACT messages, might provide
excellent material for the CICA or UBL folks to concentrate their
energies in core component and assembly rules development.
William J. Kammerer
Novannet
Columbus, OH 43221-3859 . USA
+1 (614) 487-0320
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bryce K. Nielsen" <
To: "EDI-L Mailing List" <
Sent: Tuesday, 01 February, 2005 11:13 AM
Subject: Re: [EDI-L] XML Hierarchy Question
> Don't laugh away the parsing problem as trivial. Perhaps upwards of
> 80%
> of inter-company bulk data transfer is non-EDI (in the X12 and EDIFACT
> sense). Most of it is flat files, comma-delimited records, and stuff
> like that. None of that stuff is going to be turned into classic EDI,
> even if X12 and EDIFACT got busy devising messages for each and every
> possibility.
>
This was actually the original request that sparked the germination of
xmlLinguist. One of our clients had a whole bunch of "exported" files
that they'd hired some programmer a long time ago to write. These little
one-off applications were still used by the company to export data. Some
of the data was CSV, some was fixed-width, etc. Our original intent was
to get all of that disparate data into XML, making it much easier to
deal with programmatically from there on.
With the core technology of xmlLinguist in place, we found a highly
useful tool for general application integration, as well as EDI. the
same technology could be used to translate X12 documents into XML, and
for many small businesses who are forced to use EDI to deal with large
retail outlets, this has been very handy. For them, XML is very
straight-forward and easy to deal with. X12 is not. With xmlLinguist in
the mix, they can do everything they need to do with XML first, then the
last step is to translate into X12, and they're done.
It's basically another tool in the toolbelt, good for some situations,
not so for others.
Bryce K. Nielsen
SysOnyx, Inc. (www.sysonyx.com)
Lastest article: The origins of xmlDraft, the Smart XSD Editor
http://www.sysonyx.com/xml-schema-editor
|
 |
Subscribe in XML format
| RSS 2.0 |
|
| Atom 0.3 |
|
|
Cart
