ISA and GS segment values - Value mapping v/s Predefined TPM UDFs - I

Prior to the advent of predefined TPM UDFs, different approaches were considered for incorporating ISA and GS segment values in outbound EDI interfaces.

In this article, I will try to present a comparison between Value mapping and TPM UDFs.

Requirement:

-  Populating Sender ID, Sender ID Qualifier, Receiver ID, Receiver ID Qualifier,element separator, sub-element separator and segment separator for different business partners.

-  Usage indicator based on environment (T - Test, P- Production)

Value Mapping Approach:

Example:

Mapping Details:

-Value mapping for vendor number conversion- SAP vendors are converted into Legacy Vendors

-Value mapping for retrieving sender/receiver IDs and qualifiers- The output combination is separated by a delimiter (:) , the values are split and mapped to respective        fields (SplitID UDF)

-Value mapping for retrieving separators- The output combination is separated by a delimiter (:), the values are split using a simple UDF and mapped to respective    separator fields (SpiltSep UDF)   

- fillUpToLengthWithSpace UDF is used to add spaces to the first input to the UDF (spaces equal to second input) 

- Parameter defined for usage indicator- run time T or P is assigned      

ESR mapping

Value Maps-

UDFs used-

SplitSep

SplitID

fillUpToLengthWithSpace

NWDS configuration

Mass Export/Import-

Sample csv generated - maps can be added and the file can be imported

Reference - Value Mapping

Part II- Predefined UDFs - ISA and GS segments mapping - Value mapping v/s Predefined TPM UDFs - II