> Syntax independent - MCIs - Messages > Details

SYNTAX INDEPENDENT COMPONENTS

Implementation Related Components


Message Content Inventory Identifier : IxD2xx - - (Données spécifiques (sous-)garanties Individuelles, Collectives et Hospitalisation)- - Approved , and is part of release 202001
- ( UN/Edifact : added info )
- (UN/Edifact MIG : Fr / Nl ) - (XML/JSON : added info )
Sender :
Receiver :
Status : 2 - Version : 3
Seq. n° n
u
d
(*)
Data element
Code list
Usage
Mandatory
Conditional
Optional (**)
Condition(s)
Indicator
Identifier
Version
5  
Garantie, type
No
-
-
Mand.
 
10  
Durée indemnisation
No
-
-
Option.
 
20  
Type d'allocation pour invalidité de longue durée
Yes
1
Option.
 
21 n 
Cause de l'incapacité couverte
Yes
1
Option.
 
22 n 
Type de l'incapacité couverte
Yes
1
Option.
 
30  
Subrogation conventionnelle
No
-
-
Option.
 
31 n 
Incapacité partielle couverte
No
-
-
Option.
 
32 n 
Rente viagère se transférant sur 2ième tête
No
-
-
Option.
 
40  
Capital décès
No
-
-
Option.
 
50  
Capital - indemnité journalière
No
-
-
Option.
 
60  
Capital - allocation maximale
No
-
-
Option.
 
70 u 
Capital - indemnité annuelle
No
-
-
Cond.
Mandatory IF Guarantee in 235 Rente pour frais permanents / 280 Revenu garanti 
80 u 
Intervention dès pourcentage incapacité
No
-
-
Option.
 
90 d 
Pourcentage d'invalidité permanente
No
-
-
Option.
 
91 n 
Seuil pour invalidité considérée totale
No
-
-
Option.
 
100 u 
Pourcentage de croissance de la rente
No
-
-
Cond.
Mandatory IF Guarantee in 235 Rente pour frais permanents / 280 Revenu garanti 
110 n 
Pourcentage de croissance annuelle de la rente
No
-
-
Cond.
Mandatory IF Guarantee in 235 Rente pour frais permanents / 280 Revenu garanti 

(*) 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.