[EDI-L Mailing List Archive Home] [Message List] [Reply To This Message]

RE: 856 Standard vs Pick and Pack Structure

From: "Richer, Robert" <robric@...>
Date: Mon Oct 6, 2003  2:33 pm
Subject: RE: [EDI-L] 856 Standard vs Pick and Pack Structure
Bonjour Tracy,

I'm currently working in implementing the 856 for our company. I have
customers that will require SOTPI, STOI, SOIP, and SOI....

The solution that I found to resolve this is to had in the customer's
Trading Partner profile file on my ERP (not EDI s/w) these SOTPI, STOI.
Based on this information, the program that will generate the interface file
will put the HL loops in the appropriate order based on the customer
requirements. This mean that part of my interface file will be always the
same (Header info, Shipment Loop,) but the Order, Tare, Pack & Item can or
cannot be generated based on the customer's requirement. In each loops, I
will put in my interface file as much info as I can & I will use the EDI
software to decide which information I will use to create segments and fill
in elements. This should give me flexibilities to support any type of
requirements from my customers (Pick & Pack, Standard Pack, with or without
certain loops, with or without certain segments & with and without certain
elements).

I hope this might help you or anyone else.

Good luck & have a great week,

Robert Richer
Spécialiste EDI
EDI Specialist
IPEX Inc.
3 Place du Commerce
Île-des-Soeurs
Verdun (Québec)
H3E 1H7

Tél.: (514) 769-2200 ext.: 233
1-800-363-2620
Fax: (514) 769-0096
Email: WWW:www.ipexinc.com


-----Original Message-----
From: edipro1212 [mailto: Sent: October 6, 2003 10:01 AM
To: Subject: [EDI-L] 856 Standard vs Pick and Pack Structure


Good Monday morning all,
I'll try to make this as short as possible...
All of our customers want their 856's in Pick and Pack Structure
(SOPI). We have a new customer who wants their 856 in Standard
Structure (SOIP). It is my understanding that shipping
software/systems (I don't know exactly what to call it) are set up to
do either P&P or Standard--not both. At other jobs, we have had to
programmatically re-sort the P&P data and write a new physical file
for the data in Standard format. I'm trying to explain this to our
programmer, be he insists that a new logical file over the Pick and
Pack physical will work if we use different keys. This just doesn't
seem to make sense to me--how can one file have both one item to many
packs AND one pack to many items, no matter how you sort it? Am I
crazy? I'm relatively new at this job, so I have not built up enough
credibility for anyone to believe what I'm saying. I have a meeting
with him in an hour, so any quick second (third, fourth) opinion is
very welcome.

Thank you!
Tracy

AS400, BPCS ERP, Varsity shipping software, SSA modified version of
Harbiner 3.2 translator



Yahoo! Groups Sponsor

ADVERTISEMENT

<http://rd.yahoo.com/M=194081.3897168.5135684.1261774/D=egroupweb/S=17050055
82:HM/A=1732161/R=0/SIG=11p5b9ris/*http://www.ediets.com/start.cfm?code=3050
9&media=atkins> click here

<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=194081.3897168.5135684.1261774/D=egroupmai
l/S=:HM/A=1732161/rand=356544738>

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
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EDI-L>


Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service
<http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




 
EDI to XML Mapping for EDIFACT/X12 Convert EDIFACT/X12 Schemas to XML Schema Legacy Data Conversion Tools Access Relational Data as XML Visual XSLT and XQuery Mapping Tools Simplify EDI Data Integration with Stylus Studio XML Enterprise Suite - Free Download!
Subscribe in XML format
RSS 2.0
Atom 0.3
Site Map | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Trademarks
Free Stylus Studio XML Training:
W3C Member
Stylus Studio® and DataDirect XQuery™are products from DataDirect Technologies, is a registered trademark of Progress Software Corporation, in the U.S. and other countries. © 2004-2007 All Rights Reserved.