> Syntax independent - MCIs - Messages > Details

SYNTAX INDEPENDENT COMPONENTS

Implementation Related Components


Message Content Inventory Identifier : EROD110 - Echange contextuel, données voyage - (Données voyage / Gegevens reis)
- Approved , and is part of release 202001 - ( TB2-UN/Edifact MIG : Fr / Nl ) - ( TB2-XML : added info )
Version : 1
Status : 2
Seq. n° n
u
d
(*)
Data element
Code list
Usage
Mandatory
Conditional
Optional (**)
Condition(s)
TB2-UN/EDIFACT representation (including comments)
Indicator
Identifier
Version
10  
Riskobject, type
No
-
-
Mand.
 
ROD+110 
15  
Date de début de période - départ
No
-
-
Option.
 
DTM+041 
20  
Date de fin de période - retour
No
-
-
Option.
 
DTM+022 
25  
Destination
No
-
-
Option.
 
FTX 
30  
Nombre de voyageurs
No
-
-
Option.
 
QTY+043 
35  
Type de transport
Yes
1
Option.
 
ATT+8040 

(*) 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.