|
[EDI-L Mailing List Archive Home]
[Message List]
[Reply To This Message]
RE: Re: Amount fields to be empty if they are zero?
The great thing about rules is they provide some guidance. The bad thing
about rules is that they frequently suffer from interpretation. I think
that the current statement of EDIFACT rules (ISO 9735 V4) is actually pretty
clear on the distinction between zero and empty. In ISO 9735-1:1998(E)
(this is the Application level syntax rules), there are two relevant
passages:
Section 9.1 "Insignificant characters", the first two sentences read: "In
variable length numeric data elements, leading zeroes shall be suppressed.
Nevertheless, a single zero before a decimal mark is allowed."
Section 9.2 "Significant zeros", the first two sentences read: "Significant
zeroes shall not be suppressed. A single zero may be significant, for
example, to indicate a temperature or tax rate."
In the cases this thread has presented, a single zero (whether used in
EDIFACT or X12) should be considered significant since we are trying to
convey a quantity of zero.
So, I'd summarize as follows: If you're trying to convey a zero value,
putting a value of 0 in a numeric element (be it an X12 Nx or R, or an
EDIFACT n..x) is in fact well within the syntax of the standards. It is
completely valid.
Hope that helps.
Best regards,
Bill Chessman
Inovis(tm), Inc.
-----Original Message-----
From: Andrew BK [mailto:
Sent: Friday, May 09, 2003 9:58 AM
To:
Subject: [EDI-L] Re: Amount fields to be empty if they are zero?
Thanks Chris,
I do EDIFACT also. I knew about the suppress leading zeroes and
trailing blanks, but I wasn't aware of the notion of deleting a zero
valued numeric field.
In my opinion, that compression rule has to be ignored where a value
of zero must be specified. If back end software reckoned with that
rule, would it cause Jan 1, 1970 to be unknown?
I was looking to see if anyone could cite the X12 syntax rules on
that point (which I sheepishly admit I do not have at hand).
I have to get on a conference call with our supplier and our tech
support person to sort out their confusion.
Thanks,
Andrew
--- In Chris Johnson <chrisj@e...> wrote:
> Quoted text is from <b9eokl+stk8@e...>, by Andrew BK
> <edi_meister@y...>
>
> >But this supplier thinks that putting a value of 0 in the numeric
> >element is against the X12 004010 standard.
> >
> >A value specified to be zero is not unknown.
> >Am I missing something here?
>
>
> I cannot answer your question authoritatively for X12, but you
have
> touched on what I regard as a persistent flaw in the EDIFACT
standard.
> The compression rules dictate that for variable length fields you
should
> compress away leading zeroes and trailing blanks, and that fields
which
> are all zero or blank should be suppressed.
>
> This leads you into the situation where, for example, a Stock
Level is a
> mandatory field, but your actual level is zero. If you follow the
> compression rules you suppress the data element and then, since it
is
> mandatory, the message promptly fails on a dependency violation.
You
> cannot win.
>
> In the real world converters normally allow a 'No-vanish'
attribute for
> a data element which stops the compression at a single blank or
zero.
> You are then breaking the compression rules, although I prefer to
think
> of it as 'bending' them.
>
> You may be missing something, but then I have been missing it as
well
> for the last 15 years.
>
> I will be very interested to see what the list responses are for
the X12
> case you cite.
>
> Regards
> Chris
>
> --
> Chris Johnson mobile:+44 (0)7785 302122
> EDIMatrix Ltd work: 0845 126 0680 or +44 20 8559 2454
> fax: +44 (0)20 8559 2497
> EDI website http://www.edimatrix.co.uk
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Message Identifiers: <SALES>, <JOBS>, <LIST>, <TECH>, <MISC>, <EVENT>,
<OFF-TOPIC>
Access the list online at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EDI-L
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
 |
Subscribe in XML format
| RSS 2.0 |
|
| Atom 0.3 |
|
|
Cart
