|
[EDI-L Mailing List Archive Home]
[Message List]
[Reply To This Message]
RE: Re: Amount fields to be empty if they are zero?
The supplier is always wrong. The customer is always
right!!!!
Cheers,
Stanley Pool
--- "Michael C. Rawlins"
< wrote:
> FWIW in case anyone still has any doubts. I seem to
> recall that X12C had
> an official request for interpretation sometime in
> the last couple of years
> that asked this very same question. Bill's answers
> are completely
> consistent with our interpretation.
>
> ergo, the supplier is wrong
>
> Cheers,
>
> Mike
>
> At 01:13 PM 5/9/03 -0400, Bill Chessman wrote:
> >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/
> >
> >
> >
> >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/
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------
> Michael C. Rawlins, Rawlins EC Consulting
> www.rawlinsecconsulting.com
>
>
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.
http://search.yahoo.com
|
|
Subscribe in XML format
| RSS 2.0 |
|
| Atom 0.3 |
|
|
Cart
