Re: EDI for LedgerSMB

[Ted Onley <..hidden..>]

I'm very interested in an EDI interface for LedgerSMB.  I've been working with 
EDI for many years myself, using third party communication tools and mapping tools.

I've started my own home grown program in perl using postgres, and am working on 
moving a client of mine to LedgerSMB. I have quite a bit of custom code 
currently in place to handle EDI on their old system.  I'll need to get that 
functionality working in LedgerSMB if the conversion is to be a success.

I've mainly worked with ANSI X12, but have been working with more and more 
EDIFACT trading parters with another one of my clients.

I like the idea of a bolt on interface.  I'm assuming we'd be talking about as 
close to a seamless as possible import/export of transactions.

I'd be very interested in being a part of any development effort.  I'll take a 
look at your suggested resources.

Ted Onley



David Sentinella wrote:
> Everyone -
>
> Following on from a discussion I initiated on the 'user' list, I am keen 
> to develop the requirements for a 'bolt-on' EDI interface for LedgerSMB
>
> A starting point might include some of the following resources:
>
> 1. Sacha Schlegel's excellent article, which addresses most of the 
> issues, has an Australian focus, and specifically mentions LedgerSMB's 
> predecessor S-L.
> http://www.schlegel.li/ebXML/linmagau_article/linmagau.pdf
>
> 2. The Open ebXML website: http://openebxml.sourceforge.net/
>
> 3. The United Nations Directories for Electronic Data Interchange for 
> Administration, Commerce and Transport: 
> http://www.unece.org/trade/untdid/welcome.htm
>
> 4. The Oasis (Organization for the Advancement of Structured Information 
> Standards) ebXML specification page: http://www.oasis-open.org/specs/
>
> After many years of experience with EDI for large corporations, I am 
> firmly of the belief that we will see a time where document flow will be 
> truly standardised. In the meantime, we have a fairly mature standard to 
> deal with – namely ebXML. Any discussion about EDI needs to address the 
> minor disagreements around the difference between EDIFACT and ebXML – 
> these essentially revolving around the size of messages. EDIFACT is very 
> compact, and ebXML is larger but easier to ‘read’ and arguably easier to 
> process. None of this really matters in the end, because there are many 
> tools that convert messages in both directions or either direction.
>
> The aim of a 'bolt-on' EDI interface for LedgerSMB is to facilitate B2B 
> transactions without the need for user input. Such an interface would 
> also make multi-company systems easier to manage. Chris Travers makes 
> the point that the “batch” and “separation-of-duties” interfaces 
> proposed for LSMB 1.3 would the appropriate point of interface.
>
> Some fields are needed to make this work:
>
> 1. A Boolean field in Vendor, Customer and Employee indicating that EDI 
> is to be used with this entity.
>
> 2. Fields defining the communications parameters to be used, or a 
> “Trading Partner ID”. The Trading Partner ID can be used by the bolt-on 
> system to identify the communications parameters in that system.
>
> 3. Fields defining the Type and Version of EDI the entity will accept. 
> (Not needed if "Trading Partner ID" is used - see point 2 above)
>
> I hope we can form a working group for EDI for LedgerSMB.
>
> Regards,
> David Sentinella
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
> It's the best place to buy or sell services for
> just about anything Open Source.
> http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;164216239;13503038;w?http://sf.net/marketplace
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ledger-smb-devel mailing list
> ..hidden..
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ledger-smb-devel