RFI Browser


Formal vs. Informal Help Informal Formal


Todd Cochrane


Let s assume that I have an implementation guide that indicates for a particular loop and a particular N1 value, this DTP segment is required to look like the following: DTP*AAT*D8*09282001? Where * is the separator and ? is the terminator. In syntax checking this DTP segment, do I syntax check against the standard definition above or do I syntax check DTP02, verify that DTP02 contains the required D8 and then syntax check DTP03 based on the value of the qualifier in DTP02. In this case, DTP03 would be syntax checked as a date with format of MMDDCCYY? If not a valid date, then generate a TS997. This is an illustration of the problem. What I need from ASC X12 is a ruling on this. How do you syntax check an implementation guide that is based on a version of the ASC X12 Standards.


There are two aspects to your question. One is whether or not a TS997 should be use to report noncompliance with an Implementation Guide specifying usage of the standard. Comment 1/040 of TS997 clearly states that the data segments of TS997 are to report on "the extent to which the syntax complies with the standards ". Therefore, the answer to this question is that TS997 is only specified to report on syntactic compliance with the EDI standards. The second aspect of your question seems to be more to the point of your question, and that is whether TS997 should be used to report perceived syntax violations when two data elements subject to a semantic note are not in agreement. For guidance on this topic, please refer to these excerpts from section of X12.6 defining with "Semantic Notes" in Data Segments": "A semantic note provides important additional information regarding the intended use of a standard or portion thereof. Semantic notes may also define relational conditions among data elements in a segment based on the presence of a specific value (or one of a set of values) in one of the data elements." Please refer also to the previously cited comment in TS997. It states that the data segments of TS997: "do not report on the semantic meaning of the transaction sets" Our interpretation of these two standards holds that TS997 shall not be used to report on semantic notes. Regarding the specific example referenced in your request, regardless of the value present in DTP02, a 997 TS may report a syntax error regarding the DTP03 element only if the element s value violates the syntax of a mandatory AN 1/35 element. We do, however, recognize the business need to report problems such as the one given as an example. The 824 Application Advice transaction set is the appropriate vehicle for this purpose.


The official response to a formal RFI is a letter from the current ASC X12 chair. This website often displays a summary of the RFI. Click here to view a PDF of the letter for this RFI.
Submission 1/1/2002
Status Date 1/1/2002
Status F - Final
Primary References
Document 4010