Ah yes but who will define the new standards for XML, or excuse my

ignorance, will

XML correct that minor little inconvenience... <grin>

Desmond

-----Original Message-----

From: Juergen Wondzinski [mailto:woody@prolib.de]

Sent: Monday, July 23, 2001 1:46 PM

To: Multiple recipients of ProFox

Subject: RE: EDI

Hi Greg,

The bad thing with EDI is that there is NO such thing as a standard. =

EDI is

swamped with a gazillion of different subsets and substandards, =

rendering

the whole concept a big mess. Therefor you will not find one single =

EDI

converter doing all, they are all specialized.

EDI will get replaced by XML based exchange formats, many companies =

already

switched to it. In fact, EDI is the best "worstcase" example why XML is

better suited for exchanging data betwenn different parties.

=A0Servus

=A0=A0=A0 wOOdy

=A0|_/| ---- ProLib - programmers liberty -----

=A0(.. ) Our 5=A0MVPs make the Fox run... See us

=A0 - /=A0 at www.prolib.de or www.AFPages.com

-----Original Message-----

From: profox@leafe.com [mailto:profox@leafe.com]On Behalf Of Desmond

Lloyd

Sent: Monday, July 23, 2001 8:35 PM

To: Multiple recipients of ProFox

Subject: RE: EDI

EDI is Electronic Data Exchange, a "standardized" set of transactions =

that

allows one system to talk to another. I believe the links referred to =

below

point to some of those standards... The only "problem" with EDI is the

assumption that both parties are using the same standards and are set =

up to

receive and send documents of that type. The problem often is, getting =

the

two parties to talk! Your company might consider it, assuming that =

they

already have EDI capabilities....

FWIW

Desmond....