re: EDI 867 implementation
One last thought before tomorrow's meeting....
I would like to see the PSWG recommendation regarding EDI include complying
with UIG guidelines, however we get there. Again, we need a national standard,
not a CA standard. I haven't had the time I would like to really look at all
of this (I've been living in VEE land), but things like transaction numbers
come to mind that are an integral part of EDI but don't exist in CMEP. I
believe if we laid out a plan of how to get to a full implementation of EDI
based on UIG guidelines (at least as far as file format, even if we don't
change the file transport mechanism) it would be easier to see the best path to
get there. It may be via what Jim proposes by implementing a "narrow"
implementation first and migrating to a fully compliant solution, or the costs
associated with testing and integrating the additional features required by a
fully compliant solution may indicate it's better to skip the intermediate
narrow solution.
What would help me (and I apologize - I know this is last minute) would be to
know what the differences are between the "narrow" definition and a fully
compliant solution.
Kathy Smith, ABB
919-250-5429
kathy.smith@ustra,mail.abb.com
.