Issue with VICS 4010 850

I’ve the VICS 4010 850 EDI document type installed on TN. I’ve an attribute which is retrieving information from /ST/N1/N104. When I submit a document to test, this attribute does not show up in the attributes tab of the transaction under Transactions (MWS).

When I assign anyother node other than /ST/N1, it fetches the correct information.
Any Idea what could be the issue.

Thanks In Advance,

Do your data contains value for N104 field?

refering statement (this attribute does not show up in the attributes tab of the transaction under Transactions)
it is not showing up completely or as empty?

Yes, N104 field exists in the sample data.
The attribute does not show up in the attributes tab of the Transactions.

N1 is a loop so you query should be /ST/N1[0]/N104
you have to write a custom service to get the N104 based on N101 in the N1 loop


Yes, I agree with sreenivas


Are you looping on N1 or just trying to extract N104 irrespective of its iterations?

But if you want first iteration N1/N104 itself then go as Srinivas mentioned index N1[0] above:


I have not specified the index as 0 but have a condition in place to get the index. Below is the query I used

I tried the way Sreenivas has suggested and used the same query as his and it started showing up.
I did not understand what is the difference between the two queries.


The condition does not work in the Query

you need to write a custom service and give it for attribute extraction in document type as shown in screen shot

Note:Make sure you use specification in custom service to populate the values correctly.
one.bmp (3.75 MB)

Query works that way only and can’t just give implicit loop need to have explicit mention of the iteration to work for XPATH.

As long it works for you glad to hear that:


I’ve a similar query configured for a 856 and this works pretty well.

I’m a little confused, as I see that the above query is similar to the one I have on 850. The elements HL and REF can occur more than once in an 856 and we are able to successfully retrieve this value.


Welcome to confusion world!.. :smiley:

Yes could be the way setup for the 850 identifying query:

I’ll use the query which is working then :slight_smile: