|
[EDI-L Mailing List Archive Home]
[Message List]
[Reply To This Message]
Re: UCC Code variations
> why would the case not be marked with the 3 as well, as it is the
same product?
I have entertained the notion that the product management folks didn't
set up the EAN/UCC 14 case codes correctly, but it's too late for that
now and I'm not sure I'm the one to tell them that ;^)
--- In Travis Truax <travis.truax@h...> wrote:
> Got me there. I'm so used to that never changing, I forgot it had other
> meanings.
> Ok, I found this list concerning that first digit:
>
> 0: regular UPC codes
> 1: reserved
> 2: random weight items marked at the shop
> 3: National Drug Code and National Health Related Items code
> 4: no format restrictions; for in-shop use on non-food items
> 5: for use on coupons
> 6: reserved
> 7: regular UPC codes
> 8: reserved
> 9: reserved
>
> But, I'm not sure how that digit fits into the scheme.
> If your individual items are 3:National Drug/National Health
Related, why
> would the case not be marked with the 3 as well, as it is the same
product?
> :)
>
> Travis-
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mike Rawlins [mailto:mcr2@r...]
> Sent: Friday, July 29, 2005 2:29 PM
> To:
> Subject: [EDI-L] Re: UCC Code variations
>
>
> Nope - the same manufacturer. The "58970" part identifies the
> manufacturer in this particular coding scheme. The leading "3" in the
> consumer code identifies it as an NDC code (or something to that
affect).
>
> Mike
>
> --- In Travis Truax <travis.truax@h...> wrote:
> > Grocery eh? Can't say I'm really versed in that market, but we have
> sold to
> > a few.
> >
> > Using your example:
> >
> > 3-58790-00228-6 and 1-00-58790-00228-2
> >
> > These are 2 different manufacturer ids, right? 358790 & 058790
> (presuming
> > they are not longer than 6 digits) The situation I described is
usually
> > handled with 2 separate UPCs.
> > (like 0-58790-00228-6 for the EA and 0-58790-00229-9 for the CA
and the
> > shipping case would I suppose be 1-00-58790-00228-2 or
> 1-00-58790-00229-5.
> >
> > Travis-
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Mike Rawlins [mailto:mcr2@r...]
> > Sent: Friday, July 29, 2005 1:22 PM
> > To: edi-l
> > Subject: RE: [EDI-L] UCC Code variations
> >
> >
> > At 01:10 PM 7/29/2005 -0500, Travis Truax wrote:
> > >What is a U.P.C. Case Code? Are you referring to a product that has
> > multiple
> > >consumer units (like a case of candy bars that can be purchased at
> POS or
> > >torn into and purchased separately at POS?
> >
> > The verbiage comes from the X12 standards. My experience is that
> grocers
> > and other retailers use it (using your example) to identify the
case of
> > candy bars for ordering, invoicing, and shipping purposes, and the
> > individual bars in the case would be purchased separately at POS.
> >
> > Mike
> >
> >
> > >Travis-
> > >
> > >-----Original Message-----
> > >From: Mike Rawlins [mailto:mcr2@r...]
> > >Sent: Friday, July 29, 2005 12:38 PM
> > >To: edi-l
> > >Subject: [EDI-L] UCC Code variations
> > >
> > >
> > >Another question on codes today:
> > >
> > >What is (or should be) the relationship between:
> > >
> > >U.P.C. Consumer Package Code (1-5-5) UI in X12 DE 235
> > >U.P.C./EAN Case Code (2-5-5) UA in X12 DE 235
> > >EAN/UCC 14 UK in X12 DE 235
> > >
> > >My hunch is that for any given product the first two are usually
> subsets of
> > >the third. Again, I've researched but can't find a definitive
> answer about
> > >this.
> > >
> > >I have a situation where the consumer package code isn't a subset
> of the
> > >EAN/UCC 14 code (e.g. 3-58790-00228-6 and 1-00-58790-00228-2), and my
> > >client doesn't publish the U.P.C/EAN Case code on their price list.
> Some
> > >of their customers think the 12 digit case code should have a "3"
> in the
> > >second position to match the consumer package code, and others
think it
> > >should have a "0" to match the 14 digit case code. The only values
> that
> > >are actually barcoded are the consumer package code and the EAN/UCC
> 14 code
> > >on the case.
> > >
> > >Anyone have any ideas on this?
> > >
> > >Thanks,
> > >
> > >Mike
> > >
> > >
> > >---------------------------------------------------------------
> > >Michael C. Rawlins, Rawlins EC Consulting
> > >www.rawlinsecconsulting.com
> > >Using XML with Legacy Business Applications (Addison-Wesley, 2003)
> > >www.awprofessional.com/titles/0321154940
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >.
> > >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
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------
> > Michael C. Rawlins, Rawlins EC Consulting
> > www.rawlinsecconsulting.com
> > Using XML with Legacy Business Applications (Addison-Wesley, 2003)
> > www.awprofessional.com/titles/0321154940
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > .
> > 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
