Re: EDIFACT Question

Thu, 15 Mar 2001 05:36:38 -0800

Title: RE: VMI Workflow
I've seen UNG/UNE occur in an implementation spec, I think it was in Germany and the early 90's, but the spec was eventually changed to drop the UNG/UNE; and a few other edits. Actually the initial spec I had to review was an almost literal translation into EDIFACT from something that was done in the States in X12 where functional grouping (of their X12 transactions) is more often used.
It's not wrong to use UNG/UNE but all of, the EDIFACT I've seen has simply been with the business message between the UNH/UNT; and away you go onto the wire.
I have to agree with Kurt that I've never actually used UNG/UNE for any other live EDIFACT work.
 
Dave Welsh 
Director e-Fulfillment
Nordstrom.com
 
 
-----Original Message-----
From: kurt Svensson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2001 2:52 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: EDIFACT Question

In my 12 years of experience of EDIFACT usage in Sweden and Scandinavia, I have never seen UNG/UNE used.
 
Kurt Svensson
 
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2001 6:36 PM
Subject: EDIFACT Question

I work with a company that is about to begin an EDIFACT implementation. We are trying to get an idea of what the "standard" use is of the UNA, UNB/UNZ and UNG/UNE segments. I have seen a few examples of EDIFACT in my research and I have yet to see a use of the UNA or UNG/UNE segments. In anyone's experience, do companies generally just utilize the UNB/UNZ segments in conjunction with the individual messages or do they include the Functional Group level as well?

Thank you in advance for your assistance with this matter.

John

 

 

 

Reply via email to