Re: Trading Partner Logical Identification based on EDIFACT orX12qualifiers

[Ralph Berwanger <rab7067@earthlink.net>]

While I agree with William that a standard set of identifiers should be
used, I must disagree with trying to use eitherANSI ASC X12 or ISO 9735 as a
source for trading partner identifiers witout modification to the current
structures.  Neither source attempts to create a universal listing of
trading partner identifiers, they simply capture the qualifier values
collectively for a specific standard.--you will find that the two lists
contain duplicate items and are identified by different codes.  If we can
find a single external source list, I will quickly ratify its use.  Until
then,  I suggest that we will need to either create a list or alter the
identifier so that it contains two values--one indicating the source of the
code value and the other containing the actual code value.

Ralph Berwanger
----- Original Message -----
From: "Henry Lowe" <hlowe@omg.org>
To: "David RR Webber" <Gnosis_@compuserve.com>
Cc: "William J. Kammerer" <wkammerer@foresightcorp.com>; "Dick Brooks"
<dick@8760.com>; "ebXML Transport (E-mail)"
<ebXML-Transport@lists.ebxml.org>
Sent: Monday, August 14, 2000 12:20 PM
Subject: re: Trading Partner Logical Identification based on EDIFACT or
X12qualifiers


> Hi,
>
> I wouldn't suggest using ISO 6523 as it has a very limited
> identifier space.
>
> I'm not familiar with X12 of EDIFACT's identifier schemes
> but they are undoubtedly better than 6523.  If you want
> something from ISO/ITU-T, look at ISO/IEC 9834-7.
>
> Henry
> ---------------------------------------
> At 10:24 AM 08/14/2000 -0400, David RR Webber wrote:
> >Message text written by "William J. Kammerer"
> >> The codes should just reuse those
> >available from EDIFACT, X12 or ISO 6523, rather than inventing new ones
> >like "DUNS". For example,
> >
> >    <To>
> >        <PartyId context="ISO 9735" authority="1">003897733</PartyId>
> >    </To><
> >
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >
> >Dick,
> >
> >This makes total sense - can you discuss it at your next conference
> >call and make a decision?
> >
> >Incidently I'm adding the igML definitions to the GUIDE <extensions> so
> >those EDI formats will be available there to for referencing.
> >
> >This means if you look up the GUIDE reference for PartyId you would
> >get all the information William is showing above as definition and
> >related definitions.
> >
> >Thanks, DW.
>
>