In this article, I will try to present a comparison between Value mapping and TPM UDFs for incorporating ISA and GS segment values in outbound EDI interfaces.
– 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:
-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
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