|
midrange.com
Frankly I think that they should adopt one standard, be it: ANSI X.12,
EDIFACT, XML or whatever. And no snickers from the peanut gallery about
X.12 and standards being an oxymoron. They should also bite the bullet and
purchase a translator, such as Harbinger, or whatever they're called this
week. I base this on:
1) They are looking at a project that is 'staring them down'.
2) They are looking at sending and receiving documents. I assume at some
point they will actually try to please their customers, many of whom have
probably adopted one of the above standards. Thus you'll already have some
knowledge of standards.
3) While VAN's are almost prohibitively costly, they do provide some
advantages:
a) No dependence on each others hardware being up when doing data
transmissions
b) A warm fuzzy feeling that the data isn't being snooped because it
isn't using the Internet.
But using standards doesn't necessarily mean using a VAN.
4) They already have business partners quarreling over where to place
data. Adopting a standard seems like a fair compromise.
5) A translator package will provide a lot of error checking that you are
adhering to standards.
6) The flexibility of adding yet another document to send increases when
using a translator versus 'roll your own'.
7) You already have enough to program trying to figure out:
a) How to extract data to send out.
b) How to post data received back in. In this interactive day and age,
doing batch feeds can be a bit tricky. Many canned software packages have
little to no method of doing batch feeds.
Rob Berendt
==================
Remember the Cole!
"James W.
Kilgore" To: RPG400-L@midrange.com
<qappdsn@attgloba cc:
l.net> Subject: Re: Data mapper
Sent by:
owner-rpg400-l@mi
drange.com
05/15/01 09:11 AM
Please respond to
RPG400-L
Aaron,
Isn't this the problem that XML is trying to solve? You can write your own
parser in RPG and look for the keyword pairs instead of actual location
within
the document.
So, if one trading partner want's the PO to be printed with qty, item code,
description and another wants item code, description, qty it doesn't
matter.
'Where' becomes a moot point and everyone is happy.
"Bartell, Aaron L. (TC)" wrote:
> I have a project staring me down that requires me to send and receive
> documents (PO's, Shipping Acknowledgements, Order Status) from multiple
> companies. My company currently reserves the right to have a standard
for
> sending as receiving documents but I don't think that will fly.
>
> We are using our own proprietary format to transfer the data which all of
> the companies playing adhere to, but everybody has their own idea of how
and
> where the data should be put within this format.
>
+---
| This is the RPG/400 Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to RPG400-L@midrange.com.
| To subscribe to this list send email to RPG400-L-SUB@midrange.com.
| To unsubscribe from this list send email to RPG400-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
| Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator:
david@midrange.com
+---
+---
| This is the RPG/400 Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to RPG400-L@midrange.com.
| To subscribe to this list send email to RPG400-L-SUB@midrange.com.
| To unsubscribe from this list send email to RPG400-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
| Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com
+---
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].
Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.
