Electronic data interchange- edi

[Former Member]

I read that SAP has defined its own edi standard known as idoc.

But i am not finding any articles on the web nor in scn where i can get the design history of idoc.

I mean whats the difference between standards like x12 ans idoc.Why is idoc considered better?

Can somebody please help me understanding this?

It has been one week i am looking for this information.

Thank you very much beforehand.

[Paulo_Vantini]

Hi Nousha,

ALE is technology for SAP mainly used to transfer data between SAP systems.
EDI is the independent technology use to transfer data between two systems, they can be SAP systems or non SAP systems.
The basic difference with ALE and EDI is ALE used for internal communications and EDI is meant for external communications.
Since ALE uses an IDOC format to exchange data between systems, both participating systems should understand the IDOC format.
In other words ALE normally used to distribute the master data (Ex: Material Master, Vendor Master) with in a company when you are maintain the distributed
environment. EDI is for exchanging transaction data (Purchase order,
Delivery) between two different business partners.EDI is all about the standards (Ex: ANSI X12, EDIFACT) you have to follow when you are transferring business documents.  Technically speaking, ALE transfers the data using memory
buffers whereas EDI uses file port to transfer the data.
With EDI technology you always need a translator to convert the IDOC to X12 (Outbound), X12 to IDOC (Inbound).But with ALE you don’t need a translator.

Check out this page:  http://wiki.scn.sap.com/wiki/display/ERPLO/Structural+relationship+between+IDoc+and+EDI+Standard+mes...

Regards.

[Former Member]

oh...this is so helpful

but still i have the question: we could have used x12 or edifact instead of creating another technology right??i mean even for the ALE...we could have use the x12 or any existing at that time...

because from the website you gave me, it seems that idoc can do the same thing as edifact etc...

we could have reused these standards right?instead of inventing another one....

thank you very much....every sentences have been very helpful...it helps to read further...

[Paulo_Vantini]

Nousha,

it is a question of standards. The structure of an IDoc is defined by an IDoc type. Among other things, the IDoc type contains information about which data is saved where (line and offset), The IDoc type is assigned to the message type. Whereas the message type contains only the semantics of the message (for example, material master data), the IDoc type contains the exact structure of the document for a message type. This means there can be different versions of a material master IDoc, for example, each with a different IDoc type. This enables versioning, which means that IDoc scenarios can be developed further in a compatible way.

Check out the preview of this edi book from sap press which has a scenario of an inbound edi X12 850 PO to ORDERS IDoc interface: https://www.thali.ch/files/Shop/Documents/013603_Leseprobe.pdf

Hope that solves your issue.

[Former Member]

Hello,

yes i guess...you said it right...it is a question of standards...any firm decides about the appropriate standards they find suited to their application..

however, i still have questions in my mind...haha....but dont worry...i shall look for the information by myself...as you already gave me a starting point....

thank you very much...

just to share my knowledge: yesterday i learnt that idoc is based on x12 and mostly on edifact...they had tried to merge both the goodsides from x12 and edifact together with the IDOC technology...

hence, i guess they did not invent another wheel....

indeed a good relief...lol...

but still need to know more...

indeed you have been very helpful to me...

if you find some more links related to the history of idoc...i would be grateful to you if you could send them to me...thank you very much....

bye