This thread started out with my question about an automated reconciliation standard – it’s really forked off into a different direction since then.
> If all you care about is: “Did my document get there?”,
> then using 200 is perfectly acceptable. However, once it’s
> there does the receiving system take any action?
But obviously there are processes in place to handle that – for instance, an xCBL 3.0 OrderResponse document generated by the backend. As for the controversy with HTTP 200 - hey, it can serve as an ack as long as both parties agree. And once the remote party has acknowledged receipt, the rest – processing/ async ack-ing - is their responsibility.
I do agree with you and Rob about the maturity of EDI generally – I recently had a running tiff on the xCBL discussion lists about xCBL.org releasing xCBL 4.0 incompatible with xCBL 3.x. B2B standards were supposed to have built upon the maturity of EDI – not change so fast. I also agree that the VAN/postbox paradigm is valuable – especially when servers at the either end are unreliable, as well as for consolidating management of transaction flow. We exchange EDI, as well as xCBL, via GEIS and a few other VANs. However, there are business factors that pull in an opposing direction from VANs and balance must be reached.
> I have seen some cases where businesses wait so that
> the latest technology can be incorporated into the
> Technology should serve business, not otherwise.
I agree – in fact, we are all corporate servants of some sort here.
> you can create a scheduled service that sends an email at
> the month
Since we get weekly “transfer summaries” from the VANs we deal with, an email transaction report was the first thing that came to mind (see my comment at the top of this thread).
However, these email reports are useless until someone reports a problem (generally a user, or accounts). Until we know what to look for, no one has the time to go through a transfer report line by line and manually reconcile with the backend in the off chance of a problem being there. The obvious solution is to automate the email checking process, but unless there is a standard, we have to build a custom parser for each party generating a report.
But as it happens, there isn’t a standard - so I guess emailed reports are the only option now. [ Grin ]