UBL Naming and Design Rules SC

 View Only

RE: [ubl-lcsc] Re: [ubl-ndrsc] UN/CEFACT ATG "Generic Header" Project

  • 1.  RE: [ubl-lcsc] Re: [ubl-ndrsc] UN/CEFACT ATG "Generic Header" Project

    Posted 02-25-2003 09:21
    Eduardo: All I can tell you is that the first XML-enabled round of EDI translators could only access envelope data with great difficulty. It is possible that this problem gas already been solved by some vendors (Bill, doesn't Sterling produce an EDI translator with some EDI capabilities?). I guess I'm not convinced that we will come up with the best answer by discussing this here - again, my feeling about this is that it is asked for by users. Let's talk to the generic header people and see if we can get more solid answers from a user's perspective. Cheers, Arofan