Hey, even I am not suggesting starting from scratch on every map, no one has that kind of time or patience. Unless, of course, you're getting paid by the hour and have some pretty naive customers.
Leah ________________________________ From: Jason McMahon <[email protected]> To: 'Craig Dunham' <[email protected]>; [email protected] Sent: Friday, February 8, 2013 12:49 PM Subject: RE: [EDI-L] Re: [TECH] 1 map vs many partner based maps (Best EDI Practice?) If you are using Sterling's IS (GIS) software you can build generic maps with generic envelopes and assign as many trading partners as you wish to that map. From there you can modify and rename a map from that generic one to accommodate the differences a specific trading partner requires from the rest. If it is an outbound map you may submit a test using your generic map and see if they can accept that. In spite of the specs, many companies don't need all the fields filled, so your generic test may pass. If there are differences they must have then build a separate map for them. This will cut down on the overall number of maps you have without compromising the customer's specific needs. Sincerely, Jason McMahon 10830 Lake Thames Apt A Cincinnati, OH 45242-3126 [email protected] http://www.linkedin.com/pub/jason-mcmahon/11/743/51b> http://www.linkedin.com/pub/jason-mcmahon/11/743/51b _____ From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Craig Dunham Sent: Friday, February 08, 2013 12:37 PM To: [email protected] Subject: [EDI-L] Re: [TECH] 1 map vs many partner based maps (Best EDI Practice?) When I was doing EDI for a major retailer a few years back, I used to have just that - one map for each document. Well, really, I had two. One was production and one was testing related. I had one outbound PO, one inbound ASN and one inbound Invoice. But, then again, I was "the hub"... I was the 800 lb gorilla in the room. I made the rules, trading partners adopted them and played by those rules. But, I know that some of the suppliers had multiple maps - basically one for each trading partner. I was even doing some consulting work for a company and not only did they have one map for each document for each trading partner, they also had one CL program for each document for each trading partner (they're an AS/400 i-Series shop). Best Practice...? What works best for your company and your TPs...? If you are the hub, you can do one map, all partners. But if you're the supplier (or someplace in the middle), then you will probably need to have one map, one partner. HOWEVER - you could do a bit of the best of both worlds - have a standard map for each document. If it works for the partner, you keep them (and any others) using that map. If it doesn't work, then create a modified map for the partner. If that works for another partner, use it for them, too. Basically, you'll end up with some maps for some partners, other maps for other partners and hopefully not a one map, one partner set up... Oh, and as for those fries with ketchup (or catsup, depending upon your brand), I'll do it the English way - mayonnaise, please. OR I'll go "Great White North" and do some poutine.... Have a great day! Craig Dunham Re: [TECH] 1 map vs many partner based maps (Best EDI Practice?)http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EDI-L/message/32640;_ylc=X3oDMTJybjg 4aHFkBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE1BGdycElkAzIxMDc2NzYEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1MDA1NTgyBG1zZ0lkAzM yNjQwBHNlYwNkbXNnBHNsawN2bXNnBHN0aW1lAzEzNjAzNDI0NzI-> Fri Feb 8, 2013 8:22 am (PST) . Posted by:"Leah Halpin" [email protected] ?subject=Re%3A%20%5BTECH%5D%201%20map%20vs%20many%20partner%20based%20maps%2 0%28Best%20EDI%20Practice%3F%29> I have to disagree with Mr./Ms. Whoopass on this one, at least from the customer side. Suppliers, yep, force them in line, one map for many. Now, perhaps this is industry or vertical dependent, but there's no way in h e double hockey sticks I am going to try to merge automotive OEMs into a single map. They are highly individualistic and extremely customized. It's a huge PITA even to make a change to one of the existing maps when it's for a single customer and they make a "small" change. Doing regression testing for all customers would take days or weeks if they were all in one map. One map, one customer. What if you forget a certain test case? What if you forget an odd foible of one customer? Do you really want to have more documentation than code in your map? Do you really want to have to reference every IG you have prior to making a change to see if any other customer will be affected? Do you really want to try to debug a map that used to work for all your customers, but after one small change now works for 67 out of 72 of them? Really? Make one small change to one small map, limit your time and exposure to risk. This has worked for me and the dozens of employers/clients I've worked with for nearly 20 years. Oh, and be sure to get some ketchup for those fries. Leah [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] ------------------------------------ ... Please use the following Message Identifiers as your subject prefix: <SALES>, <JOBS>, <LIST>, <TECH>, <MISC>, <EVENT>, <OFF-TOPIC> Job postings are welcome, but for job postings or requests for work: <JOBS> IS REQUIRED in the subject line as a prefix.Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EDI-L/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EDI-L/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: [email protected] [email protected] <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [email protected] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
