> Syntax independent - MCIs - Messages > Details
SYNTAX INDEPENDENT
COMPONENTS
Implementation Related Components
|
> Syntax independent - MCIs - Messages > Details
|
SYNTAX INDEPENDENT
COMPONENTS |
|
| Message Content Inventory |
Archived, and was part of release : Identifier : M0305 - Quittance, envoi type1 / Kwijting zending type 1 - (As in Community MIG's - intégration logiciel courtier - Quittances / Integratie makelaarssoftware - Kwijtingen)- - ( UN/Edifact : added info ) - (XML/JSON : added info ) |
Sender : Insurer
Receiver : Broker
Status : 3 - Version : 1
|
| Seq. n° | n u d (*) |
Data element | Code list |
Usage Mandatory Conditional Optional (**) |
Condition(s) |
||
Indicator |
Identifier |
Version |
|||||
(*) n u d : new / updated / deleted since previous version.
(*bis) u : updated : this can be a codelist-version incrementing.
Note that in many, not to say all such cases, the user-community does not await such next release to implement/activate such new codelist-values.
The reasoning is that such added value does not affect the current data-structures and hence is considered easely implementable.
Such reasoning tends to forget how given new codelist-values might not simply affect the data, but also affect the process, which might be more of a problem...
(**) Usage: The indications Mandatory / Conditional / Optional are to be understood in respect of the actual level of the Data element:
example given; some party data-set as a whole can be optional, while, if present, the party's name within that party data-set can be mandatory.
Remark: in UN/Edifact, "Mandatory / Conditional" are notions used within the standard.
And within edi-guides (a refinement of a standard) the "Conditional" can become "Required / Optional / Dependent / Advised / Not used".
Ideally we should implement the same ideas.