FA Generation

, ,
1

We are currently converting one EDI solution over to webMethods. We are currently using the Auto FA from our Unknown Trading Partner. The level of detail from our old legacy system looks like the data below.

ISA00 00 ZZXXXXXXXX 01XXXXXXXXX 0801301032U002000000225000P>/
GSFADFC100300895517120080130103236241X004010/
ST997362410001/
AK1PO49768/
AK2850700606314/
AK5A/
AK9A111/
SE6362410001/
ST997362410002/
AK1PO49769/
AK2850700606339/
AK3N318N18/
AK411666XXDAVIS RESIDENCEXX/
AK5R5/
AK9R1105/
SE8362410002/
GE236241/
IEA1000022500/

After playing with the parameters on the TPA and changing the FA Level from Transaction Set to Segment and then Element and testing with the same Inbound Invoice I do not see any differences from the 997 between the new FA listed below, but the new 997 isn’t detailed like the old system.

ISA00 00 ZZXXXXXXX 01XXXXXXXXXX 0902091712U004010000000100T>
!GSFADELTATST519659362620090209171210X004010!
ST9970001!
AK1IN6314001!
AK28100003!
AK5R!
AK9R110!
SE60001!
GE110!
IEA1*000000010!

Is there something else I need to configure to get the new 997 as detailed as the old, it is nice to be able to tell our Trading Partners exactly what is wrong with their transaction.

2

Hi,
The most details you get in the FA is if you set the FA generation to ELEMENT level, which I believe you already did.

For the second example, if you had set it at the element level, you should have seen AK3 and AK4 segments in the 997 with the rejection position and reason. We use TN and TPA for FA set at element level and we get the desired results.

This is an example from our system using TPA with FA at element level -
ISA00 00 08XXXXXXXXXX ZZXXX 0812311602U004000000165110P>~
GSFAXXXXXXXXXXXXX2008123116022095X004010~
ST9970001~
AK1PD2095~
AK285226144~
AK3XQ2**8~
AK41305*1~
AK5R5~
AK285226145~
AK5A~
AK285226146~
AK5A~
AK285226147~
AK5A~
AK285226148~
AK5A~
AK285226149~
AK5A~
AK285226150~
AK5A~
AK285226151~
AK5A~
AK285226152~
AK5A~
AK285226153~
AK5A~
AK285226154~
AK5A~
AK285226155~
AK5A~
[B]AK9R121211~[/b]
SE300001~
GE12095~
IEA1*000016511~

Can you try using wm.b2b.edi.util:generateFA with level set at Element (Instead of TPA in TN) to see if the results are different???

Anil