|
[EDI-L Mailing List Archive Home]
[Message List]
[Reply To This Message]
Re: Re: TDCC and EDI X12
Stephen Case wrote:
> "To my knowledge" there are around 6 major EDI Agencies creating and
> setting EDI standards. I have listed a few of the ones I know below. In
> most cases one or more countries or major business sectors usually nationally
> or internationally recognized will form these Agencies.
This subject could get very confusing, folks, so as a "general part of the X12
leadership" and one time Chair of X12, I thought it a good idea to drop in here
with some information. George asked a good question, and Mike Rawlins gave a
good answer and correct answer. What Stephen wrote here is not necessarily a
bad answer, but there are some bits of information we should clarify to ensure
no one gets the wrong idea. The concept of there being "around 6 major EDI
Agencies" is not far off, but ONLY if we understand that is on an international
basis, and there is really only one "agency," properly called a "standards
body," for each country.
> For the US, Canada and Mexico the ANSI (American National Standard
> Institute) X12 committee is the 800-pound gorilla of EDI.
We in various leadership roles for ASC X12 thank you for the "800 pound
gorilla" characterization, but there are times when we do not quite feel that
way. *grin* Actually, the American National Standards Institute Accredited
Standards Committee X12 (ANSI ASC X12) is the national EDI standards body ONLY
for the United States. The standards we make are used to some extent in a
number of countries around the world (including Canada, Mexico, Korea, and
Australia), but that tends to be only because the specific trading partners
involved are doing some of the business with the US. Those other countries
have their own national standards bodies as well, like the Standards Council of
Canada, but do not necessarily make their own EDI standards, preferring to
adopt UN/EDIFACT or some other standard.
> For most of the world outside the Americas EDIFACT "The United Nations
> Standard" seems to be the more dominate agency because of it support for
> multiple languages and double bit characters.
It is generally correct to say UN/EDIFACT is used throughout the world, but not
simply because of support for multiple languages and double-byte characters.
The acceptance and use of UN/EDIFACT has a lot more to do with the
international flavor of its development, and is a discussion I would prefer to
save for another time. It tends to get VERY involved.
> ODETTE and TRADACOM are European standards, respectively, the first
> being heavily used by the automotive industry and the other the ABI Brokernet
> out of the UK.
Yes, both of those standards were developed in Europe, and the reason ODETTE is
the EDI standard for the European automotive industry is it was specifically
developed by and for those companies. There are still a LOT of standards
around from the days when the technology was still maturing, and the good ones
are still in use at various levels. The TRADACOMS standard is the national EDI
standard of the United Kingdom, having been developed by the British Standards
Institute (BSI), and is used in a LOT more systems than just the one cited. It
is also a lot older than many people realize, predating X12 in some respects
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
|
|
Subscribe in XML format
| RSS 2.0 |
|
| Atom 0.3 |
|
|
Cart
