| Author |
Message
|
| sebastian |
 Posted: Mon Apr 26, 2004 5:30 am Post subject: Message set for CWF to XML |
 |
|
Centurion
Joined: 12 Nov 2003
Posts: 110
Location: Philadelphia
|
MQ people:
Our shop has been using the Neon transform nodes in v2.1 to change SAP IDOCS to XML ouput. I am trying to avoid the use of the Neon component and use a defined message set for the conversion. I am currently learning a lot about the tool but had some high-level questions I was hoping you could help me with.
1 - I formerly worked with the Biztalk and it had the capability of directly importing XML to define a message specification (similar to message set). Does MQSI v2.1 have a similar tool? I see a DTD import but was hoping to pull in just an xml data sample to create the xml message set.
2 - To make a conversion from CWF to XML, is it best to define a single message set with the two types defined or two separate message sets defined with separate types?
3 - When defining repeating tags in XML, is there a way to set this to 'unlimited' instead of a specific upper limit?
4 - Some of my input data has repeating data that occurs within repeating data. Should this be defined as a compund type within another compound type?
this is the image of what I am trying to ouput
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1" ?>
- <HEADER_TAG>
- <EDI_DC40>
<EDI_DC40_FIELD>1234</EDI_DC40_FIELD>
</EDI_DC40>
- <E1STZUM>
<E1STZUM_FIELD>1234</E1STZUM_FIELD>
</E1STZUM>
- <E1STZUTH repeating="yes">
<E1STZUTH_FIELD>1234</E1STZUTH_FIELD>
- <E1STZUTL repeating="yes">
<E1STZUTL_FIELD>1234</E1STZUTL_FIELD>
</E1STZUTL>
</E1STZUTH>
- <E1MASTM repeating="yes">
<E1MASTM>1234</E1MASTM>
</E1MASTM>
- <E1STKOM repeating="yes">
<E1STKOM_FIELD>1234</E1STKOM_FIELD>
</E1STKOM>
- <E1STPOM repeating="yes">
<E1STPOM_FIELD>1234</E1STPOM_FIELD>
</E1STPOM>
</HEADER_TAG>
Any feedback is appreciated,
Seb
_________________
sebastian signature |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| basha |
| Posted: Mon Apr 26, 2004 7:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
Apprentice
Joined: 25 Apr 2004
Posts: 31
|
Sebastian,
I cannot answer all the questions but can answer a few.
1. You can very well import a message set into a WMQI message set. But for that you need a CSD 5 or 6 ( dont remember). The message that helps you do that is : "mqsiimpxmlschmea". You can search for it in this forum for further details.
2. If you want to convert into a self defining XML then a single message set will do.
3. NO IDEA
4. I guess you need to use a compund type within another compound type. If you import your schema , these compund types are created automatically.
I have a document that has an example of CWF to XML conversion. If you need that, I can send it to your personal e-mail.
Thanks. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| sebastian |
| Posted: Mon Apr 26, 2004 8:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
Centurion
Joined: 12 Nov 2003
Posts: 110
Location: Philadelphia
|
Any information you could share would be welcome.
graperd@wyeth.com
thanks,
Seb
_________________
sebastian signature |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Duke |
| Posted: Mon Apr 26, 2004 10:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Apprentice
Joined: 09 Mar 2004
Posts: 49
Location: Belgium
|
Hello,
To define that there are the element is not bound to an upper limit set to max occurs : -1.
_________________
Pierre Richelle
Engineer
IBM Certified MQSeries Developper V5.3
IBM Certified WMQ Administration V6 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| wooda |
| Posted: Wed Apr 28, 2004 1:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
Master
Joined: 21 Nov 2003
Posts: 265
Location: UK
|
1. I believe Basha's response says it all.
2. This is a design decision. It depends where else you want to use each of the messages. If they are in the same message set then they can only be deployed together. It makes litlte difference to the performance of the broker. Also if the two messages are logically the same then there is some advantage in defining just one message with both an XML and CWF identity.
3. As mentioned by Duke if you define the max occurs of the field in the xml message to -1 all repeats will be parsed. Although it is true that you can leave the fields to be self-defined if you do this then you cannot validate the fields using the MRM.
4. You are correct you need nested compund types here. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| sebastian |
| Posted: Wed Apr 28, 2004 3:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
Centurion
Joined: 12 Nov 2003
Posts: 110
Location: Philadelphia
|
I tried using -1 for the maximum occurs and it will not take. The apply button gets greyed out and it looks like it will only accept positive numbers.
We are at the base level of config mgr and control center so this may be a version issue.
Have any of you created MRM definitions for SAP IDOCs? If so, was it easier to create the DTD first or did you start by defining the message set. From what I have seen so far, creating the DTD looks like the way to go.
Sebastian
_________________
sebastian signature |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
