Skip to Main Content

Integration

Announcement

For appeals, questions and feedback about Oracle Forums, please email oracle-forums-moderators_us@oracle.com. Technical questions should be asked in the appropriate category. Thank you!

How to remove a particular segment or element from a standard ecs?

851253Jan 6 2012 — edited Jan 16 2012
Hi,

We are using EDI DESADV D96A standard ecs for an outbound transaction in Oracle B2B 10g.
Standard ecs file generated is as follows:

UNA:+.? '
UNB+UNOC:3+5790000024599:14+7319860000000:14+111219:1424+1757'
UNH+*1752*+DESADV:D:96A:UN:EAN005'
BGM+351+5036048+9'
DTM+137:201112191424:203'
DTM+232:20111213:102'
NAD+Z01+7319860000000::9'
NAD+LSP+5790000024599::9'
NAD+DP+5790000024599::9'
RFF+AAJ:5036048'
CPS+1'
LIN+1'
PIA+5+441642:SA'
PIA+1+1156N:NB'
QTY+21:200'
QTY+12:200'
DTM+360:20160801:102'
FTX+Z02+++118.54'
CNT+1:200'
CNT+2:1'
UNT+19+*1752*'
UNZ+1+1757'

However the client requirement is that CPS segment be removed as well as message reference number element coming in UNH and UNT fields be removed. So the generated file should be like this:

UNA:+.? '
UNB+UNOC:3+5790000024599:14+7319860000000:14+111219:1424+1757'
UNH++DESADV:D:96A:UN:EAN005'
BGM+351+5036048+9'
DTM+137:201112191424:203'
DTM+232:20111213:102'
NAD+Z01+7319860000000::9'
NAD+LSP+5790000024599::9'
NAD+DP+5790000024599::9'
RFF+AAJ:5036048'
LIN+1'
PIA+5+441642:SA'
PIA+1+1156N:NB'
QTY+21:200'
QTY+12:200'
DTM+360:20160801:102'
FTX+Z02+++118.54'
CNT+1:200'
CNT+2:1'
UNT+19
UNZ+1+1757'

But the above mentioned fields are mandatory and cannot be ignored. I have tried excluding the element fields and segments through B2B document editor and updated the changed ecs on b2b console but it is failing at B2B validation.
Kindly guide me the correct stepwise procedure to achieve this customization.
This is a bit urgent.
Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks a ton in advance.

Regards,
Sandeep
Comments
Locked Post
New comments cannot be posted to this locked post.
Post Details
Locked on Feb 13 2012
Added on Jan 6 2012
6 comments
377 views