|
[EDI-L Mailing List Archive Home]
[Message List]
[Reply To This Message]
RE: Compliance Question
Denise and list,
The problem with supplying trailing element separators is that X12.6
paragraph 3.7 prohibits them. Therefore, a translator which enforces this
particular requirement of the standard would reject the segment.
Gary, as is often said, god is in the details. Sell it.
Art Douglas
Manager, eCommerce Systems
PaperPak
San Dimas, CA
909-971-5025
-----Original Message-----
From: Denise Tate [mailto:
Sent: Friday, April 08, 2005 12:02 PM
To: Gary Bligh;
Subject: RE: [EDI-L] Compliance Question
I don't see a system problem populating the trailing elements but why would
you if your not going to use them? Just gets stripped off in translation and
adds to the character cost if going through a van. Both segments are the
same...
denise
-----Original Message-----
From: Gary Bligh [mailto:
Sent: Friday, April 08, 2005 1:57 PM
To:
Subject: [EDI-L] Compliance Question
All,
A colleague is asserting that it is okay to populate trailing element
separators preceeding a segment terminator.
Here is an example:
N1*SF*Gary***
Whereas, all the years I worked in EDI, the ANSI standard, as I understood
them was that the segment should be translated like this:
N1*SF*Gary
Gary
.
Please use the following Message Identifiers as your subject prefix:
<SALES>, <JOBS>, <LIST>, <TECH>, <MISC>, <EVENT>, <OFF-TOPIC>
Access the list online at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EDI-L
Yahoo! Groups Links
.
Please use the following Message Identifiers as your subject prefix:
<SALES>, <JOBS>, <LIST>, <TECH>, <MISC>, <EVENT>, <OFF-TOPIC>
Access the list online at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EDI-L
Yahoo! Groups Links
|
 |
Subscribe in XML format
| RSS 2.0 |
|
| Atom 0.3 |
|
|
Cart
