EDIFACT to XML approach in the Port of Antwerp

Transcription

1 EDIFACT to XML approach in the Port of Antwerp

2 Agenda 1. XML/EDIFACT Definition 2. XML/EDIFACT Standards 3. Conclusions 4. Why XML 5. Messages in use

3 First of all This is certainly not a plea to eliminate or change EDIFACT-standards, change EDIFACT-messages or the way they are used today nor to change all EDIFACT-formats into XML-formats EDIFACT-messages are very valuable and can be kept in use as is It s not an OR story but rather an AND-AND story So keep using edifact & develop edifact-standards! It is merely a warm call to install some XML-Standardization in the maritime industry as an alternative for those who want to use alternative technologies (for whatever reason) 3

4 1 XML/EDIFACT Definition

5 XML/EDIFACT Whauwww There is in fact a wikipedia definition for it! XML/EDIFACT is an Electronic Data Interchange (EDI) format used in Business-tobusiness transactions. It allows EDIFACT message types to be used by XML systems. EDIFACT is a formal, readable language-for-machine description of electronic business documents. It uses a syntax close to delimiter separated files. This syntax was invented in the 1980s to keep files as small as possible. Because of the Internet boom around 2000, XML started to become the most widely supported file syntax. But for example, an invoice is still an invoice, containing information about buyer, seller, product, due amount. EDIFACT works perfectly from the content viewpoint, but many software systems struggle to handle its syntax. So combining EDIFACT vocabulary and grammar with XML syntax makes XML/EDIFACT. The rules for XML/EDIFACT are defined by ISO TS

6 2 XML/EDIFACT Standards

7 XML/EDIFACT Standards (1) XEDI Not really an official standard The names of the XML structure are based on the EDI structure. (loop, segment, composite, element) Element are identified by means of attributes, derived from the EDI tags transactionset + message type as code attribute <transactionset code="berman"> loop + segment group as code attribute <loop code="nad"> segment + segment as code attribute <segment code="bgm"> element + composite data element as code attribute <element code="c082"> element + data element as code attribute <element code="3039"> 7

8 XML/EDIFACT Standards (1) DTD: XML: 8

9 XML/EDIFACT Standards (2) ISO ISO/TS 20625:2002 ( Electronic data interchange for administration, commerce and transport (EDIFACT) -- Rules for generation of XML scheme files (XSD) on the basis of EDI(FACT) implementation guidelines Variant 1: The names of the XML structure will be derived from the EDI tags. They will be given a prefix depending on the structure level (segment group, segment, composite data element or data element). M_ + message type + [suffix] G_ + segment group + [suffix] S_ + segment + [suffix] C_ + composite data element + [suffix] D_ + data element + [suffix] M_ORDERS G_SG36 or G_LIN_ALC S_LIN C_C082_2 D_3035 (the suffix is optional and can be generated based upon various semantic understanding of EDI elements) 9

10 XSD XML 10

11 XML/EDIFACT Standards (2) ISO Variant 2: Speaking, more readable, tags can be used instead of the EDIFACT codes, if desired. If using readable tags the EDI origin of the corresponding element can be documented by an appropriate attribute value or with other means of documentation. <MessageHeader> <BeginningOfMessage> <GroupDetailsOfTransport> <DetailsOfTransport> <ModeOfTransport> </ModeOfTransport> </DetailsOfTransport> </GroupDetailsOfTransport> 11

12 XSD XML 12

13 3 Conclusions

14 Conclusions on translation standards XEDI not really /not a lot in use ISO is a more widespread and more used standard variant 1 is less readable then variant 2 structure optimization leads to smaller, more human readable XML messages according to ISO this standard provides a sound method of representing semantic facts APCS and PoA choose for ISO standard, variant 2. 14

15 4 Why XML

16 Why XML XML is native supported, out of the box, by most programming languages and tools So no (extra) costs & investments needed in extra, often expensive, software needed for EDIFACT-architecture Resources / EDIFACT-specialists are getting more scarce on global software-market XML is more easily readable than edifact Some advantages in handling XML-messages electronic syntax description through the use of XSDs, which let you easily validate the correct syntax of an XML, and which allows you to force correct type-definitions during validation, before further coding and processing 16

17 So it s not only XML, but XML/EDIFACT We have chosen for XML-messaging instead of EDIFACT-messaging, but with every respect for previous and precious efforts in EDIFACT-standardization by many organisations or associations UN/CEFACT, SMDG, PROTECT, by re-using the "EDIFACT modelling language XML/EDIFACT reuses business content defined in UN/EDIFACT. 17

18 5 Messages in use

19 Messages in use (in alphabetical order) APERAK BAPLIE COARRI CODECO COPINO CUSREP CUSRES IFTDGN IFTSAI IFTSTA 19

20 Q & A?