Edi idoc interface-ale-bapi-badi-user exits

Electronic Data Interchange
The electronic communication of business transactions, such as orders, confirmations and
invoices, between organizations. Third parties provide EDI services that enable
organizations with different equipment to connect. Although interactive access may be a
part of it, EDI implies direct computer-to-computer transactions into vendors' databases
and ordering systems.
The Internet gave EDI quite a boost. However, rather than using privately owned
networks and the traditional EDI data formats (X12, EDIFACT and TRADACOMS),
many business transactions are formatted in XML and transported over the Internet using
the HTTP Web protocol. See X12, EDIFACT, TRADACOMS, extranet, externalization,
XML and HTTP.
Marketing Dictionary: electronic data interchange (EDI)
The exchange of information from one company to another using a computer network,
such as the Internet. Electronic data interchange involves computer-to-computer
exchanges of invoices, orders, and other business documents and therefore effects cost
savings and improves efficiency because it minimizes the errors that can occur if the
same information has to be typed into computers more than once. At the same time, EDI
provides an easily accessible mechanism for companies to buy, sell, and trade
information. In the business-to-business market, major corporations have embraced EDI
systems, and in order to reduce costs and improve efficiency and competitiveness, many
corporate giants are now demanding that their suppliers convert their sales and
purchasing operations into EDI systems as well. In the retail market, the use of EDI
systems allows the retailer to implement quick response strategies that can reduce the
time they must hold merchandise in inventory, which can result in substantial cost
savings for the retailer.
Accounting Dictionary: Electronic Data Interchange (EDI)
Transmission of business transactions from one company's computer to another
company's computer. Transmission is achieved through an electronic communication
network that uses translation software to convert transactions from a company's internal
format to a standard EDI format. Companies that participate in EDI are referred to as
trading partners. Trading partners may be involved in on-line banking, on-line retailing,
and electronic funds transfer. There are paperless transactions in an electronic format. In
the case of EDI, the auditor should be cognizant of the possible impact on the gathering
of evidential matter.

Small Business Encyclopedia: Electronic Data Interchange
Electronic data interchange (EDI) is the electronic movement of data between or within
organizations in a structured, computer-retrievable data format that permits information
to be transferred from a computer program in one location to a computer program in
another location without rekeying. EDI includes the direct transmission of data between
locations; transmission using an intermediary such as a communication network; and the
exchange of computer tapes, disks, or other digital storage devices. In many cases,
content-related error checking and some degree of processing of the information are also
involved. EDI differs from electronic mail in that an actual transaction is transmitted
electronically, rather than a simple message consisting primarily of text.
EDI is used for electronic funds transfer (EFT) between financial institutions, which
facilitates such common transactions as the direct deposit of payroll checks by
employers, the direct debit of consumer accounts to make mortgage or utility payments,
and the electronic payment of federal taxes by businesses. Another common application
of EDI involves the direct exchange of standard business transaction documents—such as
purchase orders, invoices, and bills of lading—from one business to another via
computer. EDI is also used by retail businesses as part of their electronic scanning and
point-of-sale (POS) inventory replenishment systems. Overall, EDI offers a number of
benefits to businesses and—thanks to the rapid evolution of the related technology—is
becoming more readily available to small businesses all the time.
Benefits of Edi
"EDI saves money and time because transactions can be transmitted from one
information system to another through a telecommunications network, eliminating the
printing and handling of paper at one end and the inputting of data at the other," Kenneth
C. Laudon and Jane Price Laudon wrote in their book Management Information Systems:
A Contemporary Perspective. "EDI may also provide strategic benefits by helping a firm
'lock in' customers, making it easier for customers or distributors to order from them
rather than from competitors." EDI was developed to solve the problems inherent in
paper-based transaction processing and in other forms of electronic communication. In
solving these problems, EDI is a tool that enables organizations to reengineer information
flows and business processes. It directly addresses several problems long associated with
paper-based transaction systems:
• Time delays—Paper documents may take days to transport from one location to
another, while manual processing methodologies necessitate steps like keying and
filing that are rendered unnecessary through EDI.
• Labor costs—In non-EDI systems, manual processing is required for data keying,
document storage and retrieval, sorting, matching, reconciling, envelope stuffing,
stamping, signing, etc. While automated equipment can help with some of these
processes, most managers will agree that labor costs for document processing
represent a significant proportion of their overhead. In general, labor-based
processes are much more expensive in the long term EDI alternatives.

• Accuracy—EDI systems are more accurate than their manual processing
counterparts because there are fewer points at which errors can be introduced into
the system.
• Information Access—EDI systems permit myriad users access to a vast amount of
detailed transaction data in a timely fashion. In a non-EDI environment, in which
information is held in offices and file cabinets, such dissemination of information
is possible only with great effort, and it cannot hope to match an EDI system's
timeliness. Because EDI data is already in computer-retrievable form, it is subject
to automated processing and analysis. It also requires far less storage space.
Infrastructure for Edi
Several elements of infrastructure must exist in order to introduce an EDI system,
including: 1) format standards to facilitate automated processing by all users, 2)
translation software to translate from a user's proprietary format for internal data storage
into the generic external format and back again, 3) value-added networks to solve the
technical problems of sending information between computers, 4) inexpensive
microcomputers to bring all potential users—even small ones—into the market, and 5)
procedures for complying with legal rules. It has only been in the past several years that
all of these ingredients have fallen into place.
FORMAT STANDARDS. To permit the efficient use of computers, information must
be highly organized into a consistent data format. A format defines how information in a
message is organized: what data goes where, what data is mandatory, what is optional,
how many characters are permitted for each data field, how data fields are ordered, and
what codes or abbreviations are permitted.
Early EDI efforts in the 1960s used proprietary formats developed by one firm for
exclusive use by its trading partners. This worked well until a firm wanted to exchange
EDI documents with other firms who wanted to use their own formats. Since the different
formats were not compatible, data exchange was difficult if not impossible. To facilitate
the widespread use of EDI, standard formats were developed so that an electronic
message sent by one party could be understood by any receiver that subscribes to that
format standard. In the United States the Transportation Data Coordinating Committee
began in 1968 to design format standards for transportation documents. The first
document was approved in 1975. This group pioneered the ideas that are used by all
standards organizations today.
North American standards are currently developed and maintained by a volunteer
organization called ANSI (American National Standards Institute). The format for a
document defined by ANSI is broad enough to satisfy the needs of many different
industries. Electronic documents are typically of variable length and most of the
information is optional. When a firm sends a standard EDI purchase order to another
firm, it is possible for the receiving firm to pass the purchase order data through an EDI
translation program directly to a business application without manual intervention. In the

late 1990s, international format standards were established and introduced as well to
facilitate international business activity.
TRANSLATION SOFTWARE. Translation software makes EDI work by translating
data from the sending firm's internal format into a generic EDI format. Translation
software also receives a sender's EDI message and translates it from the generic standard
into the receiver's internal format. There are currently translation software packages for
almost all types of computers and operating systems.
VALUE-ADDED NETWORKS (VANS). When firms first began using EDI, most
communications of EDI documents were directly between trading partners.
Unfortunately, direct computer-to-computer communications requires that both firms 1)
use similar communication protocols, 2) have the same transmission speed, 3) have
phone lines available at the same time, and 4) have compatible computer hardware. If
these conditions are not met, then communication becomes difficult if not impossible. A
value-added network (VAN) can solve these problems by providing an electronic
mailbox service. By using a VAN, an EDI sender need only learn to send and receive
messages to or from one party: the VAN. Since a VAN provides a very flexible computer
interface, it can talk to virtually any type of computer. This means that to conduct EDI
with hundreds of trading partners, an organization only has to talk to one party. In
addition, VANs provide important security elements for dissemination of information
between parties.
INEXPENSIVE COMPUTERS. The fourth building block of EDI is inexpensive
computers that permit even small firms to implement EDI. Since microcomputers are
now so prevalent, it is possible for firms of all sizes to deal with each other using EDI.
PROCEDURES FOR COMPLYING WITH LEGAL RULES. Legal rules apply to
the documents that accompany a wide variety of business transactions. For example,
some contracts must include a signature or must be an original in order to be legal. If
documents are to be transmitted via EDI, companies must establish procedures to verify
that messages are authentic and that they comply with the agreed-upon protocol. In
addition, EDI requires companies to institute error-checking procedures as well as
security measures to prevent unauthorized use of their computer systems. Still, it is
important to note that some sorts of business documents—such as warranties or
limitations of liability—are difficult to transmit legally using EDI.
Wikipedia: Electronic Data Interchange
An inter-company, application-to-application communication of data in standard format
for business transactions Electronic Data Interchange (EDI) is a set of standards for
structuring information that is to be electronically exchanged between and within
businesses, organizations, government entities and other groups. The standards describe
structures that emulate documents, for example purchase orders to automate purchasing.
The term EDI is also used to refer to the implementation and operation of systems and
processes for creating, transmitting, and receiving EDI documents.

Despite being relatively unheralded, in this era of technologies such as XML services, the
Internet and the World Wide Web, EDI is still the data format used by the vast majority
of electronic commerce transactions in the world.
Standards
Generally speaking, EDI is considered to be a technical representation of a business
conversation between two entities, either internal or external. Note, there is a perception
that "EDI" consists of the entire electronic data interchange paradigm, including the
transmission, message flow, document format, and software used to interpret the
documents. EDI is considered to describe the rigorously standardized format of electronic
documents.
The EDI (Electronic Data Interchange) standards were designed to be independent of
communication and software technologies. EDI can be transmitted using any
methodology agreed to by the sender and recipient. This includes a variety of
technologies, including modem (asynchronous, and bisynchronous), FTP, Email, HTTP,
AS1, AS2, WebSphere MQ, etc. It is important to differentiate between the EDI
documents and the methods for transmitting them. While comparing the bisynchronous
protocol 2400 bit/s modems, CLEO devices, and value-added networks used to transmit
EDI documents to transmitting via the Internet, some people equated the non-Internet
technologies with EDI and predicted erroneously that EDI itself would be replaced along
with the non-Internet technologies. These non-internet transmission methods are being
replaced by Internet Protocols such as FTP, telnet, and e-mail, but the EDI documents
themselves still remain.
As more trading partners use the Internet for transmission, standards have emerged. In
2002, the IETF published RFC 3335, offering a standardized, secure method of
transferring EDI data via e-mail. On July 12th, 2005, an IETF working group ratified
RFC4130 for MIME-based HTTP EDIINT (aka. AS2) transfers, and is preparing similar
documents for FTP transfers (aka. AS3). While some EDI transmission has moved to
these newer protocols the providers of the value-added networks remain active.
EDI documents generally contain the same information that would normally be found in
a paper document used for the same organizational function. For example an EDI 940
ship-from-warehouse order is used by a manufacturer to tell a warehouse to ship product
to a retailer. It typically has a ship to address, bill to address, a list of product numbers
(usually a UPC code) and quantities. It may have other information if the parties agree to
include it. However, EDI is not confined to just business data related to trade but
encompasses all fields such as medicine (e.g., patient records and laboratory results),
transport (e.g., container and modal information), engineering and construction, etc. In
some cases, EDI will be used to create a new business information flow (that was not a
paper flow before). This is the case in the Advanced Shipment Notification (856) which
was designed to inform the receiver of a shipment, the goods to be received and how the
goods are packaged.

There are four major sets of EDI standards:
• The UN-recommended UN/EDIFACT is the only international standard and is
predominant outside of North America.
• The US standard ANSI ASC X12 (X12) is predominant in North America.
• The TRADACOMS standard developed by the ANA (Article Numbering
Association) is predominant in the UK retail industry.
• The ODETTE standard used within the European automotive industry
All of these standards first appeared in the early to mid 1980s. The standards prescribe
the formats, character sets, and data elements used in the exchange of business
documents and forms. The complete X12 Document List includes all major business
documents, including purchase orders (called "ORDERS" in UN/EDIFACT and an "850"
in X12) and invoices (called "INVOIC" in UN/EDIFACT and an "810" in X12).
The EDI standard says which pieces of information are mandatory for a particular
document, which pieces are optional and give the rules for the structure of the document.
The standards are like building codes. Just as two kitchens can be built "to code" but look
completely different, two EDI documents can follow the same standard and contain
different sets of information. For example a food company may indicate a product's
expiration date while a clothing manufacturer would choose to send color and size
information.
Standards are generally updated each year.
Specifications
Organizations that send or receive documents from each other are referred to as "trading
partners" in EDI terminology. The trading partners agree on the specific information to
be transmitted and how it should be used. This is done in human readable specifications
(also called Message Implementation Guidelines). While the standards are analogous to
building codes, the specifications are analogous to blue prints. (The specification may
also be called a mapping but the term mapping is typically reserved for specific machine
readable instructions given to the translation software.) Larger trading "hubs" have
existing Message Implementation Guidelines which mirror their business processes for
processing EDI and they are usually unwilling to modify their EDI business practices to
meet the needs of their trading partners. Often in a large company these EDI guidelines
will be written to be generic enough to be used by different branches or divisions and
therefore will contain information not needed for a particular business document
exchange. For other large companies, they may create separate EDI guidelines for each
branch/division.
Transmission
Trading partners are free to use any method for the transmission of documents. In the past
one of the more popular methods was the usage of a bisync modem to communicate

through a Value Added Network (VAN). Some organizations have used direct modem to
modem connections and Bulletin Board Systems (BBS), and recently there has been a
move towards using some of the many Internet protocols for transmission, but most EDI
is still transmitted using a VAN. In the healthcare industry, a VAN is referred to as a
"Clearinghouse".
Value Added Networks
In the most basic form, a VAN acts as a regional post office. They receive transactions,
examine the 'From' and the 'To' information, and route the transaction to the final
recipient. VANs provide a number of additional services, e.g. retransmitting documents,
providing third party audit information, acting as a gateway for different transmission
methods, and handling telecommunications support. Because of these and other services
VANs provide, businesses frequently use a VAN even when both trading partners are
using Internet-based protocols. Healthcare clearinghouses perform many of the same
functions as a VAN, but have additional legal restrictions that govern protected
healthcare information.
VANs also provide an advantage with certifcate replacement in AS2 transmissions.
Because each node in a traditionally business-related AS2 transmission usually involves a
security certificate, routing a large number of partners through a VAN can make
certificate replacement much easier.
Internet
Until recently, the Internet transmission was handled by nonstandard methods between
trading partners usually involving FTP or email attachments. There are also standards for
embedding EDI documents into XML. Many organizations are migrating to this protocol
to reduce costs. For example, Wal-Mart is now requiring its trading partners to switch to
the AS2 protocol.
Interpreting data
Often missing from the EDI specifications (referred to as EDI Implementation
Guidelines) are real world descriptions of how the information should be interpreted by
the business receiving it. For example, suppose candy is packaged in a large box that
contains 5 display boxes and each display box contains 24 boxes of candy packaged for
the consumer. If an EDI document says to ship 10 boxes of candy it may not be clear
whether to ship 10 consumer packaged boxes, 240 consumer packaged boxes or 1200
consumer packaged boxes. It is not enough for two parties to agree to use a particular
qualifier indicating case, pack, box or each; they must also agree on what that particular
qualifier means.
EDI translation software provides the interface between internal systems and the EDI
format sent/received. For an "inbound" document the EDI solution will receive the file
(either via a Value Added Network or directly using protocols such as FTP or AS2), take

the received EDI file (commonly referred to as a "mailbag"), validate that the trading
partner who is sending the file is a valid trading partner, that the structure of the file
meets the EDI standards and that the individual fields of information conforms to the
agreed upon standards. Typically the translator will either create a file of either fixed
length, variable length or XML tagged format or "print" the received EDI document (for
non-integrated EDI environments). The next step is to convert/transform the file that the
translator creates into a format that can be imported into a company's back-end business
systems or ERP. This can be accomplished by using a custom program, an integrated
proprietary "mapper" or to use an integrated standards based graphical "mapper" using a
standard data transformation language such as XSLT. The final step is to import the
transformed file (or database) into the company's back-end enterprise resource planning
(ERP).
For an "outbound" document the process for integrated EDI is to export a file (or read a
database) from a company's back-end ERP, transform the file to the appropriate format
for the translator. The translation software will then "validate" the EDI file sent to ensure
that it meets the standard agreed upon by the trading partners, convert the file into "EDI"
format (adding in the appropriate identifiers and control structures) and send the file to
the trading partner (using the appropriate communications protocol).
Another critical component of any EDI translation software is a complete "audit" of all
the steps to move business documents between trading partners. The audit ensures that
any transaction (which in reality is a business document) can be tracked to ensure that
they are not lost. In case of a retailer sending a Purchase Order to a supplier, if the
Purchase Order is "lost" anywhere in the business process, the effect is devastating to
both businesses. To the supplier, they do not fulfill the order as they have not received it
thereby losing business and damaging the business relationship with their retail client.
For the retailer, they have a stock outage and the effect is lost sales, reduced customer
service and ultimately lower profits.
In EDI terminology "inbound" and "outbound" refer to the direction of transmission of an
EDI document in relation to a particular system, not the direction of merchandise, money
or other things represented by the document. For example, an EDI document that tells a
warehouse to perform an outbound shipment is an inbound document in relation to the
warehouse computer system. It is an outbound document in relation to the manufacturer
or dealer that transmitted the document.
Advantages of using EDI over paper systems
EDI and other similar technologies save a company money by providing an alternative to,
or replacing information flows that require a great deal of human interaction and
materials such as paper documents, meetings, faxes, email, etc. Even when paper
documents are maintained in parallel with EDI exchange, e.g. printed shipping manifests,
electronic exchange and the use of data from that exchange reduces the handling costs of
sorting, distributing, organizing, and searching paper documents. EDI and similar

technologies allow a company to take advantage of the benefits of storing and
manipulating data electronically without the cost of manual entry or scanning.
Barriers to implementation
There are a few barriers to adopting electronic data interchange. One of the most
significant barriers is the accompanying business process change. Existing business
processes built around slow paper handling may not be suited for EDI and would require
changes to accommodate automated processing of business documents. For example, a
business may receive the bulk of their goods by 1 or 2 day shipping and all of their
invoices by mail. The existing process may therefore assume that goods are typically
received before the invoice. With EDI, the invoice will typically be sent when the goods
ship and will therefore require a process that handles large numbers of invoices whose
corresponding goods have not yet been received.
Another significant barrier is the cost in time and money in the initial set-up. The
preliminary expenses and time that arise from the implementation, customization and
training can be costly and therefore may discourage some businesses. The key is to
determine what method of integration is right for your company which will determine the
cost of implementation. For a business that only receives one P.O. per year from a client,
fully integrated EDI may not make economic sense. In this case, businesses may
implement inexpensive "rip and read" solutions or use outsourced EDI solutions provided
by EDI "Service Bureaus". For other businesses, the implementation of an integrated EDI
solution may be necessary as increase in trading volumes brought on by EDI force them
to re-implement their order processing business processes.
The key hindrance to a successful implementation of EDI is the perception many
businesses have of the nature of EDI. Many view EDI from the technical perspective that
EDI is a data format; it would be more accurate to take the business view that EDI is a
system for exchanging business documents with external entities, and integrating the data
from those documents into the company's internal systems. Successful implementations
of EDI take into account the effect externally generated information will have on their
internal systems and validate the business information received. For example, allowing a
supplier to update a retailer's Accounts Payables system without appropriate checks and
balances would be a recipe for disaster. Businesses new to the implementation of EDI
should take pains to avoid such pitfalls.
Increased efficiency and cost savings drive the adoption of EDI for most trading partners.
But even if a company would not choose to use EDI on their own, pressures from larger
trading partners (called hubs) often force smaller trading partners to use EDI.
See also
• B2B
• cXML
• Xcbl
• E-business

• EDIFACT
• Enterprise application integration
• HL7
• OASIS (organization)
• RosettaNet
• Smart contracts
• Standard Carrier Alpha Codes
• Workgroup for Electronic Data Interchange
• X12
• X12 Document List
• X12 EDIFACT Mapping
External links
• EDI Introduction — Minnesota Department of Labor & Industry website.
• EDI: An Introduction — a visiting fellow on Australian National University
website.

Understanding the components of SAP IDocs
(http://articles.techrepublic.com.com/5100-10878_11-1051228.html)
SAP’s presence in the IT world is justified by a central premise: It turns a company’s
many individual systems into one, big supersystem. More than a linking together of
applications, SAP’s implementation causes a redirection of the flow of information
through a company and its partner companies that enhances the potential of its business
functions.
This flow of information is enabled by a core element in SAP technology: the
Intermediate Document, or IDoc. Technically, the IDoc is an example of Electronic Data
Interchange (EDI). Unlike conventional EDI, IDocs are not based on a descriptive
language.
The IDoc concept borrows the best features of EDI and combines them with the best
features of conventional transaction file formats. The result is a lean data transport
mechanism that is the engine of SAP data flow, tying together applications, databases,
companies, and networks. Here is a look at the makeup of IDocs within the application
architecture.
Form and content: IDoc terminology
As is often the case with proprietary technologies, SAP assigns specific, object-oriented
meanings to familiar terms. When referring to IDocs, the term document refers to a set of
data comprising a functional group of records with a business identity. (For example, all
the data in a purchase order, or all the profile information of a supplier in a supplier
master record.)
A message refers to the contents of a specific implementation of an IDoc; it’s a logical
reference. This differs from a reference to the IDoc itself, which specifies the message’s
physical representation. Think of it this way: If you’re watching a parade pass by, the
mayor waving to the crowd from his limousine is the message, and the mayor’s limousine
(which is specific to the mayor) is the IDoc. You’re building a logical object, and the
IDoc is both its container and the vehicle that moves it.
The IDoc control record
Each IDoc has a single control record, always the first record in the set. The structure of
this record describes the content of the data records that will follow and provides
administrative information, such as the IDoc’s functional category (Message Type/IDoc
Type), as well as its origin (Sender) and destination (Receiver) as in conventional EDI
(see Figure A).
Figure A
IDOC number Sender Receiver Port Message type IDoc type
1234567890 R3NYC R3LA FILE INVOICES INVOICE01
Layout of an IDoc control record

This “cover slip” format informs the receiving system of the IDoc’s purpose, and the
receiving system uses it to determine the correct processing algorithm for handling the
arriving IDoc.
Data records
The data records following the control record are structured alike, including two sections:
a segment information section and a data section.
In the first part of a data record, the segment information section describes the structure
of the data that follows, for the benefit of the IDoc processor. There is a segment name
(like an EDI segment identifier) that corresponds to a data dictionary structure to which
the IDoc processor has access. The remaining information is useful for foreign systems,
such as a partner company’s Oracle system, which has no such data dictionary.
The second part of the record is the data itself, a storage area of 1,000 characters.
Status records
If you’ve ever ordered a package from a faraway location and tracked its progress using
the Internet-based tracking utilities now provided by most major parcel carriers, you’re
familiar with the list of stops and transfer points through which a package passes on its
way to you.
This collection of records is exactly what you’ll see in an IDoc that has begun its work.
Following the data records in an IDoc, status records accumulate as an IDoc makes its
way from one point in a process to another.
Typically, an IDoc will acquire several of these records as its does its job. They are
simple records, consisting of a status code (there are more than 70 codes, covering a
broad range of conditions and errors), a date/time stamp, and some additional status
information fields for system audit purposes. In addition, as errors occur in the processing
of an IDoc, status records (see Figure B) are used to record these errors and the date/time
of their occurrence.
Figure B
(Display Status Record)
IDoc number 0000000000123456
Direction 1 Outbound
Status information
38 IDoc archived
(additional descriptive text)
Log time
Date 6-30-02
Time 14:35:21
Portion of IDoc status display
IDoc Base
IDocs, as data formatting tools, enable the easy sharing of data between databases and

applications within a company as well as being an efficient data courier between
companies. Typically in SAP, a database of IDoc definitions exists, to which any
application may have access.
This “IDoc Base” gives all the applications and processes in your company domain the
capacity to send, receive, and process a document in a contextually appropriate way,
without doing anything to the data. For example, a purchase order IDoc can filter through
every process it touches, passing from system to system, accumulating status records to
track its progress.
Every department using the data can use it appropriately without any cumbersome
intermediate processes, because each department draws its key to interpreting the IDoc
from the same source.
Multiple messages
One cumbersome feature of conventional EDI is the embedding of more than one
functional record type in a document. The unwieldy X-12 888 Item Maintenance
transaction set is an example: It purports to handle so many different configurations of
product master data that it is horrifically difficult to integrate into an existing system.
IDocs, on the other hand, handle multiple messages with ease. Given the centralized IDoc
interpretation that SAP provides to all its parts, it’s no problem to define an IDoc that will
contain more than one message, that is, more than one data record type.
A customer master IDoc, for example, may contain customer profile information records
for a customer with many locations. But it may also contain location-specific pricing
information records for that customer in the same document. This is an incredibly
efficient way of bundling related records, particularly when passing large amounts of
complex information from system to system (see Figure C).
Figure C
CONTROL RECORD
DATA RECORD - CUST PROFILE LOC #1
DATA RECORD - CUST DISCOUNT STRUCTURE LOC #1
STATUS RECORD
STATUS RECORD
STATUS RECORD
Records in a multiple-message IDoc
Final thought
There is no mastering SAP without mastering its workhorse, the IDoc. ERP environments
utilizing SAP and similar platforms are made necessary in the first place by the
increasing demands of ever more integrated business relationships. IDoc technology

addresses this trend with a simple but powerful design philosophy: Data is no longer
something to be stored; it’s something to be moved.
IDOC INTRODUCTION & STRUCTURE
Written by Anon.
IDOC type and IDOC. An Intermediate Document (IDOC) type represents the structure of the
data associated with a message type (DEBMAS02 for message type DEBMAS — Customer
Master, and WMMBID02 for message type WMMBXY— Goods Movements), while an IDOC is an
object containing the data of a particular message type. IDOCs are data containers with
intelligence built in. Each IDOC contains one and only one business object. For example, an
IDOC of type SHPMNT01, message type SHPMNT, will contain data only of one Shipment
Document. Generally, the architecture of an IDOC is independent of the message type by virtue
of ALE’s ability to redefine it for any message type.
{mosgoogle}
An IDOC consists of three record types: the control record, the data record, and the status record
(see Figure 1).
Figure 1 Structure of an IDOC .
• The control record, or EDI_DC, is a control structure that contains several fields with
information about the IDOC, such as what IDOC type it is, the message type, sender and receiver
information, and direction (1 for outbound, 2 for inbound). This information provides control data
on the outbound, and processing options on an inbound IDOC. It also has as its key the Client
(MANDT) and the IDOC number (DOCNUM). The EDI_DC record of an IDOC is stored in table
EDIDC. Every IDOC has one control record.
• The data record, which conforms to the structure EDI_DD, contains the application data.
Every EDI_DD record has a key portion that is 55 bytes in length (or 63, depending on the SAP
release), which consists of several fields describing the content of the record. The key of 55/63
bytes is followed by a field SDATA, which is 1000 bytes in length and of data type Long
Character. The SDATA field holds the application data, and its structure is determined by the key
field SEGNAM (Segment Name). An IDOC consists of one or more data records, and its
sequence and structure are dictated by the sequence and structure of segments in a given IDOC
type. The SDATA portion of the data record is redefined for every occurrence based on the

structure of the segment, with the first 55/63 bytes of the data record identifying the segment
name, sequence, and hierarchy. In an outbound interface, ALE/EDI function modules populate
these segments with application data. In an inbound interface, the application modules process
the data contained in the segments. Data records are stored on table EDID2 that belongs to the
cluster EDI30C.
In SAP, from a Data Dictionary perspective, IDOC segments adhere to a naming convention.
Each segment has three components, each marked by a different prefix —E1 for segment type,
E2 for segment definition, and E3 for segment documentation. For example, the first segment of
IDOC type DEBMAS02 is E1KNA1M. Its definition is contained in structure E2KNA1M, and its
documentation is in E3KNA1M. When the IDOC is externalized, we see the segment name
addressed by its E2 prefix. For all practical purposes, we will use only the E2 prefix when
referring to IDOC segments. Also, most segment names represent Data Dictionary tables.
• The status record conforms to the dictionary structure EDI_DS. It contains information on the
state of the IDOC as it passes through the various stages of processing. The STATUS field has a
length of two bytes (data type CHAR), with a range of values: 01–41 for outbound and 50–73 for
inbound IDOCs. The status record also includes date and timestamps for when that particular
state was reached. The status records maintain a history of the IDOC states. An IDOC may have
one or more status records, which are stored in table EDIDS (see Figure 2, page 82). These
records can be accessed or created only by SAP function modules (APIs), and are not
externalized.
Figure 2 the IDOC database .
IDOC objects consist of a Basic IDOC type, an Extension type, and an IDOC type.
In an R/3 system, IDOCs are identified by a unique IDOC number (field DOCNUM), and all three
record types are tied together with this number. The IDOC number is internally assigned by SAP.
It is possible to maintain the number range of IDOCs.
You can display information about IDOC record types by executing transaction WE61 or using the
following menu path from the main R/3 menu: Tools -> Administration -> Administration -> Process
Technology -> IDOC -> IDOC Basis (*) -> Documentation -> IDOC Record Types. You can reach
IDOC Basis (*) by executing transaction WEDI, which is frequently used in ALE and EDI. You can
display information about IDOC types, such as DEBMAS02 and INVOIC01 by executing
transaction WE60 or using the following menu path from WEDI: Documentation -> IDOC types.

What is ALE?
(http://www.erpgenie.com/consultant-tips/62-ale--edi--b2b/597-what-is-ale)
Written by Anon.
ALE is SAP proprietary technology that enables data communications between two or
more SAP R/3 systems and/or R/3 and external systems. When a new enterprise resource
planning (ERP) solution such as R/3 is implemented, companies have to interface the
ERP system with legacy systems or other ERP systems. ALE provides intelligent
mechanisms whereby clients can achieve integration as well as distribution of
applications and data. ALE technology facilitates rapid application prototyping and
application interface development, thus reducing implementation time. The ALE
components are inherently integrated with SAP applications and are robust, leading to a
highly reliable system. ALE comes with application distribution/integration scenarios as
well as a set of tools, programs, data definitions, and methodologies that you can easily
configure to get an interface up and running.
The message-based architecture of ALE comprises three layers:
Application layer. This layer provides ALE with an interface to R/3 to originate or
receive messages containing data to or from external (or other R/3) systems.
Distribution layer. The distribution layer filters and converts messages containing data
based on predefined or custom-defined rule sets. These conversions may occur to ensure
compatibility between different releases of R/3 and R/2.
Communications layer. ALE communications are carried out both synchronously and
asynchronously. Synchronous message transmissions are typically used for the direct
reading of control data, while asynchronous message transmissions are used for
transmitting or receiving application data. It is also possible to achieve a pseudo-real-time
exchange of application data using transactional Remote Function Calls (tRFC), which
I’ll detail later in this article series.
ALE scenarios fall into three categories: master data, transactional data, and control data
distribution. Although the underlying principles are the same for the different categories,
there are differences in their functions and configurations. SAP delivers over 200 ALE
scenarios; and by extension there are approximately 200 application areas that can
leverage ALE technology for data distribution or communication. A subset of these
scenarios is supported by R/3 for Electronic Data Interchange (EDI).
There are several advantages to using ALE technology:
• SAP ensures release independence.
• Robust mechanisms capture changes to master data or transactional data.
• ALE offers better inbound interface performance compared to traditional techniques

such as Batch Data Communications (BDC) or Call Transactions. ALE does not use
screen-based batch input.
• ALE provides black-box technology, so the user is at a higher level.
• Most ALE interfaces can be prototyped in a couple of days, resulting in smaller
implementation timelines.
• There is little or no ABAP program development. In most cases, the SAP-delivered
ALE functionality meets the requirements.
• ALE offers a systematic and organized approach to custom enhancements and
extensions.
• An ALE interface is easy to maintain due to the structured approach and minimal
number of development objects.
• ALE is the strategic architecture for R/3 “loose coupling” with legacy and third-party
applications and is a Business Framework key element. It provides a message-based
architecture for asynchronous integration of Business Framework components, including
Business Components, Business Objects, and BAPIs.
ALE Building Blocks and Concepts
The following building blocks are fundamental to ALE functionality:
Logical System. A Logical System (LS) is the representation of an R/3 or external system
in SAP R/3 for the distribution of data to and from the R/3 System. Every R/3 client used
for ALE or EDI has to have a base LS associated with the client. This LS becomes the
“sender” for outbound messages and a “receiver” for inbound messages. In addition to
the base LS, a second LS should be created within that R/3 system for each R/3 or
external system used for ALE interfaces. In an inbound ALE interface, this second LS
represents the sender (another R/3 or external system) with respect to the base LS
(receiver). In an outbound ALE interface, this second LS is the receiver on behalf of the
R/3 or external system with respect to the base LS (sender).
Message type. A message type represents the application message exchanged between
R/3 systems and R/3 and an external system. A message type characterizes the data sent
across systems and relates to the structure of the data called an IDOC type (see below).
For example, MATMAS is a message type for Material Master, and INVOIC is a
message type for an Invoice (Billing Document). ALE supports over 200 message types
in R/3 and about 200 application areas.
IDOC type and IDOC. An Intermediate Document (IDOC) type represents the structure
of the data associated with a message type (DEBMAS02 for message type DEBMAS —
Customer Master, and WMMBID02 for message type WMMBXY— Goods
Movements), while an IDOC is an object containing the data of a particular message
type. IDOCs are data containers with intelligence built in. Each IDOC contains one and
only one business object. For example, an IDOC of type SHPMNT01, message type
SHPMNT, will contain data only of one Shipment Document. Generally, the architecture
of an IDOC is independent of the message type by virtue of ALE’s ability to redefine it
for any message type.

Customer Distribution Model. In an R/3 system, the Customer Distribution Model is a
tool that stores information about the flow of messages across various systems. The
Customer Distribution Model uses an SAP-delivered Distribution Reference Model as its
basis (the Customer Distribution Model can have distribution scenarios other than ones
stored in the Distribution Reference Model.) The Customer Distribution Model stores
data that dictates which messages (message types) flow to which Logical Systems. Many
messages can flow to one Logical System, and one message can flow to several systems.
With the use of filter objects and listings (which I’ll describe shortly), it is also possible
to specify in a model the criteria for filtering information for a specific system. A
Customer Distribution Model can be created in an R/3 system with that client’s base
Logical System as the “sender” Logical System.
Use transaction BD64 or the following menu path to maintain the model: From the IMG
(Implementation Guide), Cross-Application Components -> Distribution (ALE) (*) ->
Distribution Customer Model -> Maintain Distribution Customer Model Directly ->
Maintain Distribution Customer Model Directly.
The IMG for ALE, Distribution (ALE) (*), can also be directly invoked by using
transaction SALE. This transaction is used very frequently in ALE. (I’ll discuss the
process of creating, maintaining, and distributing a Customer Distribution Model later in
this article.)
Filter object type and filter objects. A filter object type is used in the Customer
Distribution Model to impose a selection criterion on the message (type) flowing to a
Logical System. A filter object type with a value associated with it is called a filter
object. For example, BUKRS (Company Code) is a filter object type available for
message type DEBMAS (Customer Master). To distribute Customer master data of only
Company Code “1001” to a particular Logical System, you would use filter object type
BUKRS to create a filter object with value BUKRS = 1001. You can have multiple filter
objects with different values for the same message type associated with that LS. While
determining the receiver(s) of a particular message based on the Distribution Model, ALE
performs object filtering. As with the Customer Distribution Model, filter objects are
relevant only to ALE.
(I’ll explain the steps to create a filter object, as well as how to create a new filter object
type, later in this article.)
Listings. Listings are a special filter object type occurrence and are also used to specify a
selection criterion for distributing master data. Listings are based on the SAP
Classification system (classes and characteristics), and are applicable only to Material,
Customer, and Vendor master data. Once a list has been created, based on certain
classification information using the ALE customizing menu, it is associated with an LS.
The listing is then used to create a filter object with type LISTING, for a message type
associated with that LS.

Lists are maintained and allocated to an LS from the ALE customizing guide using
transaction SALE, or Distribution Scenarios -> Master Data Distribution -> Distribution
via Listings.
Change pointers. Change pointers are R/3 objects that mark changes to SAP master data.
Change pointers are managed by mechanisms in a Shared Master Data (SMD) tool and
are based on Change Document (CD) objects. CD objects record the changes occurring to
master data at a field level. These changes are stored in tables CDHDR (header table) and
CDPOS (detail table). ALE configuration provides a link between CD objects and change
pointers. Internal mechanisms update tables BDCP and BDCPS, which host the change
pointers. While CD objects are application-data-specific, the processing status of change
pointers is message-type-specific. Also, the ALE change pointers are activated first at a
general level and then at the message-type level.
ALE provides powerful capabilities to capture changes occurring to master data and to
distribute them via the IDOC interface. This feature can be used to keep two or more
systems synchronized with respect to master data.
Ports. A port is a logical representation of a communication channel in SAP, with the
data communicated being IDOCs. There are four types of ports that can be defined in
R/3: tRFC, File, R/2, and Internet. ALE can use all port types to distribute IDOCs, while
EDI typically uses a file-based port. tRFC and File ports can link to RFC destinations
connected to R/3-to-R/3 or TCP/IP. By linking ports to RFC destinations, the port can
also trigger scripts to invoke EDI subsystems, IDOC mapping software, and FTP.
You can maintain ports by executing transaction WE21 or WEDI, or selecting IDOC ->
Port Definition. RFC destinations can be maintained using transaction SM59.
Process codes. Process codes are used in ALE and EDI to identify the function module or
API to be invoked for subsequent processing. An inbound interface uses a process code
to determine the application module that will process the inbound IDOC to an SAP
application object such as a sales (Customer) order (process code — ORDE), Material
Master record (MATM), or a shipment (SHIP). An outbound interface uses process codes
only in the case of applications that use message control (which I’ll get to shortly). In this
case, the process code identifies the application module that populates the IDOC with
application data. Each process code is associated with a message type. Outbound process
codes are stored in table TEDE1, while inbound process codes are stored in TEDE2.
Use transaction WE41 to display outbound process codes and WE42 to display inbound
codes, or from WEDI select Control -> Outbound Process Codes/Inbound Process Codes,
or from ALE customizing SALE select Extensions -> Outbound -> Maintain Process
Code, or Extensions -> Inbound -> Maintain Process Code.
Message control and output type. In R/3, message control is a mechanism by which
documents are output based on certain selection criteria, requirements, and sequences.
Message control determines the type of document, its timing, number, and medium (print,

fax, ALE, or EDI.). Outbound messages in SD (Sales and Distribution) and MM
(Materials Management, Purchasing) are created and processed by message control
records. The output records are stored in the NAST table.
Message control uses the condition technique. The conditions for creating an output
message are stored in condition tables that have selection fields picked from a catalog of
application fields/tables. To determine if an application document qualifies for output,
search strategies are used through access sequences, output procedures, and requirements.
Once a message qualifies for output, message control modules use the parameters set in
the condition type or output type to determine the timing of transmission and the medium
of the message. The output type also specifies the program or module to be invoked to
create the output.
Message/output determinations are concepts applicable not only to EDI and ALE, but
also to other output mediums.
Partner profile. A partner profile is an identifier for a system used for communicating
messages. There are four types of partner profiles: KU for Customer, LI for Vendor, B
for Bank, and LS for Logical System. KU, LI, and B are used for EDI partners, while LS
is used for ALE communications. Every partner profile used for ALE must be based on
an existing LS.
A partner profile brings together several ALE and EDI elements to define the parameters
of communication between two or more systems. Other than general information, you
have to maintain inbound parameters, outbound parameters, and message control. The
main parameters are message types, IDOC types, process codes, partner functions,
application identifiers, message functions, output types, and ports. Other parameters also
determine the mode of processing and error handling.
A partner profile plays a major role and can be viewed as a gateway for ALE and EDI
communications. It routes the specified messages through defined IDOC types to a given
port after invoking the appropriate function modules for outbound processing. It receives
IDOCs of a specific type, and it identifies modules to post data to the application
databases in the case of inbound interfaces.
Use transaction WE20 to maintain partner profiles, or from WEDI select IDOC ->
Partner Profile, or from SALE (ALE Customizing guide) -> Communication -> Manual
maintenance of partner profiles -> Maintain partner profiles.
The processes in the application layer and the ALE layer are completed on both the
inbound and outbound processing sides. The communication layer transfers the data by
transactional Remote Function Call (tRFC) or by EDI file interface.
The process can be divided into the following sub-processes:
1. Outbound Processing

1. • Receiver determination
2. • Calling the generated outbound function module
3. • Conversion of BAPI call into IDoc
4. • Segment filtering
5. • Field conversion
6. • IDoc version change
7. • Dispatch control
2. IDoc dispatch
IDocs are sent in the communication layer by transactional Remote Function Call (tRFC)
or by other file interfaces (for example, EDI).
tRFC guarantees that the data is transferred once only.
3. Inbound Processing
1. • Segment filtering
2. • Field conversion
3. • Transfer control
4. • Conversion of IDoc into BAPI call
5. • BAPI function module call
6. • Determination of IDoc status
7. • Posting of application data and IDoc status
8. Error Control
Interrogating the Distribution Model
You do not have to interrogate the distribution model, it is optional.
There are two function modules that can interrogate the ALE distribution model:
ale_model_determine_if_to_send and ale_model_info_get.
ale_model_determine_if_to_send is called with the message type and possibly
with the logical receiving system if it is already known in the application. A check
is made in the ALE distribution model that a message flow has been maintained
for the input parameters. If this is not so, the export parameter idoc_must_be_send
is set to initial; otherwise, an "X" is returned. If there are filter objects in the
distribution model that control this message flow, they are not evaluated. An IDoc
must only be created if ale_determine_if_to_send returns an "X".
Module ale_model_info_get is used for more complex queries made to the ALE
distribution model. It is called with the message type to be dispatched. In return,
you get a table containing all the potential recipients of this message type, as well
as the associated filter objects. Note that there may be several entries for one
receiver in the table returned. If there are no entries in the distribution model, the
exception no_model_info_found is issued. If an exception is issued, an IDoc does

not have to be created. Otherwise an IDoc does have to be created. You will find
the receiving logical system in the rcvsystem field in a table entry.
The end result, that is, whether the receivers receives an IDoc and what the IDoc
looks like, is only determined after all the filter objects for a message flow in the
distribution model have been evaluated. This is carried out in the ALE layer.
Structure of Control Records The control record consists of a field string for the
structure edidc. The relevant fields are listed below; all other fields should be left
with their initial values. List of fields for the control record Field Description
Comment mestyp Logical message type. Conveys the business meaning of the
message. Mandatory field idoctp Basic structure of the IDoc. Identifies the layout
set that uses this message. Mandatory field cimtyp Structure of customer
extension. If the customer extends an SAP basic structure, he must give a name to
the structure of his extension. Mandatory field if customer has made an
enhancement. Otherwise initial. rcvprt Partner type of the receiver; “LS” (i.e.
logical system) for ALE. Optional field. See below. rcvprn Partner number of the
receiver; the logical system for ALE. Optional field. See below. rcvpfc Partner
function of the receiver; normally initial for ALE. Optional field. See below.
When the receiving system has been determined from the distribution model, it
can be written to field rcvprn. Then field RCVPFC must be filled with "LS" (for
logical system). If necessary, the partner function can be written into the field
RCVPFC. However, the partner function is not normally used in ALE. What is
important, is that either both rcvprt and rcvprn are left empty or that both are
filled. If rcvprt and rcvprn are passed with their initial values, the receivers are
determined entirely in the ALE layer.
Structure of the Data Records Replacing SAP Codes with ISO Codes [Seite 67]
The data records of an IDoc are created in an internal table with structure EDIDD.
The relevant fields are shown below. Important Table Fields for Creating IDoc
Data Records Field Description SEGNAM Segment type of the IDoc data record
SDATA 1000 byte-long character field for the data used by the IDoc The
remaining fields in EDIDD should be left initial. All the segment types and their
sequence are specified in the IDoc structure. The data records are structured
according to this sequence and included in the internal table. For each segment
type of the IDoc structure, there is a DDIC structure with the same name. A field
string with this structure is used for creating a data record. The application data is
mapped to the field string. The segment type is written to the field SEGNAM, and
the field string is written to the field SDATA. This data record is then included in
the internal table with the structure edidd.
Converting Currency Amounts Currency amounts have to be converted from an
SAP system format to a format that can be understood externally. In the SAP
system, all currency amounts are stored with two decimal places. If a currency has
a different number of decimal places, the currency amount has to be converted.
You can use function module CURRENCY_AMOUNT_SAP_TO_IDOC for this

conversion; it performs a suitable currency amount conversion for IDocs. We
recommend that you encapsulate the code in a subroutine <SEGMENT-
TYP>_CURRENCY_SAP_TO_IDOC.
Replacing SAP Codes With ISO Codes There are ISO codes for country keys,
currency keys, units of measure and shipping instructions. According to SAP
design guidelines, you should use ISO codes for an IDoc if they are available.
When you set up the IDoc, the SAP codes have to be replaced by ISO codes. To
do this, you can use these function modules: Function modules for converting
SAP codes Domain Function module Currency keys
CURRENCY_CODE_SAP_TO_ISO Country keys COUNTRY_CODE_SAP-
TO_ISO Units of measure UNIT_OF_MEASURE_SAP_TO_ISO Shipping
instructions SAP_TO_ISO_PACKAGE_TYPE_CODE We recommend that you
encapsulate the code in a SUBROUTINE <SEGMENT-
TYP>_CODES_SAP_TO_ISO.
Left-justified Filling of IDoc Fields All fields must be filled left-justified. This
happens automatically for character fields. If the original field of the application
is a non-character field, you must execute a condense on the corresponding field
in the IDoc segment. To find out which fields require a condense, see the
documentation structure for a segment type. The name of the documentation
structure begins with "E3" or "Z3" (instead of “E1” or “Z1”); otherwise it is the
same. This structure contains the same fields as the "E1" or "Z1" structure. But
here you will find the original data elements and domains of the application. All
fields with a data type unequal to char, cuky, clnt, accp, numc, dats, tims or unit
require a condense. We recommend that you encapsulate the code in a subroutine
<SEGMENT-TYP>_CON
Calling MASTER_IDOC_DISTRIBUTE After the
MASTER_IDOC_DISTRIBUTE has been called, you must specify a COMMIT
WORK; the standard Database Commit at the end of the transaction is not
sufficient. The COMMIT WORK does not have to directly follow the call; it can
be specified at higher call levels or after multiple calls of
MASTER_IDOC_DISTRIBUTE. Note that the IDocs created remain locked until
the called transaction has been completed. If you want to unlock them earlier, you
can call one of the following function modules: • DEQUEUE_ALL releases all
locked objects • EDI_DOCUMENT_DEQUEUE_LATER as a parameter releases
the transferred IDocs If the application document is created via the update
program, the call of MASTER_IDOC_DISTRIBUTE must also be performed in
update task (if an update call has not already been performed at a higher level).
Exceptions and Export Parameters of MASTER_IDOC_DISTRIBUTE The
module uses the table parameter COMMUNICATION_IDOC_CONTROL to
return the control records of the IDocs that were created in the database. To find
out the IDoc number and the current status for example, see fields DOCNUM
AND STATUS. In general, this table is not relevant to the calling application. If

the IDoc recipient was passed in the control record when
MASTER_IDOC_DISTRIBUTE was called, but the distribution model does not
allow the recipient to receive this IDoc, exception
ERROR_IN_IDOC_CONTROL is output with an appropriate error message. If a
receiver was not given in the control record and ALE does not find a recipient in
the distribution model, an exception is not issued. If you want to react to this case,
you must query the return table COMMUNICATION_IDOC_CONTROL. If this
table is empty, no IDoc was created. This different behavior for the initial and
non-initial receiver has historical reasons. The initial recipient is the standard case
for master data replication: here it is of no further interest whether an IDoc was
actually created. Presetting the receiver is the standard for dispatching transaction
data: if an IDoc is not created, this is interpreted as an error.
Sample ALE scenarios
Now let’s explore a couple of sample ALE scenarios. The first illustrates a few interfaces
with an external warehouse management system using ALE technology. The second
depicts the distribution of master data between two or more R/3 systems. These scenarios
are a small sample of the multitude of possible ALE interfaces.
Example 1: Consider a business scenario in which R/3 needs to be interfaced with an
external warehouse management system (WMS) (see Figure 3). This scenario assumes
that the Inventory Management module is being implemented. In an outbound interface,
the SAP application communicates to the WMS picking requests — Materials in the
warehouse that need to be picked for packing and shipping. Message type PICKSD,
whose corresponding IDOC type is SDPIOD01, is used. This IDOC consists of a header
with fields for delivery number, shipping point, total weight of delivery, units of
measurement, and the name and address of the ship-to party. The header is followed by
one or more detail segments that contain the delivery items with fields for item number,
Material number, quantity, and units of measure.
Figure 3 Sample ALE scenario-Interface with Warehouse Management System.
After the receipt of the picking request and completion of the operation, the WMS sends
a pick confirmation back to SAP. This is an inbound interface to SAP from the external

system where message type SDPICK is used. Its corresponding IDOC type is SDPIID01.
This IDOC type also has a header segment followed by one or more detail segments. The
IDOC communicates the Material quantities picked by the warehouse based on deliveries
sent earlier. It can handle batch splits, movement type splits, and also invoke a “post
goods issue” process.
As seen in Figure 3, there are several inbound inventory interfaces that can be handled by
one single message type WMMBXY. These inbound interfaces are typically goods
movement transactions, including inventory receipts (with or without a purchase order),
inventory status change, goods receipts against production orders, and inventory
reconciliation. Most goods movement types are supported by this message type. The
corresponding IDOC type is WMMBID01 (or WMMBID02 in 4.x releases), which can
handle multiple line items for a single header. In the case of inventory reconciliation,
ALE function modules need to be enhanced to modify the data contained in the inbound
IDOC for inventory adjustments based on comparing the stock in WMS versus SAP. This
can be achieved easily with a few lines of code in a Customer function (user exit)
provided by SAP in the ALE function module.
Example 2: Let’s look at another simple ALE scenario distributing master data across
multiple R/3 systems (see Figure 4, page 86). In large companies, there are advantages to
distributing applications and databases, especially if the differentiating parameters can be
used to segment the data discretely, such as plants, lines of business, geographic
locations, and departments. In this example, the company headquarters is responsible for
maintaining master data such as Customer Master and Material Master. This is loosely
coupled with two different plants/companies, 1001/US01 and 2001/EU01, to which
master data is distributed. ALE provides the capability to filter data and distribute it only
to relevant systems. We can distribute the master data pertaining to that particular
plant/company code. The filter object type used for message type MATMAS (Material
Master) is WERKS (plant), and for DEBMAS (Customer Master), it is BUKRS
(company code). Initially, after the Customer Master and Material Master are loaded
during conversion at the headquarters, we can transmit the relevant data to each plant or
company. Then, on an ongoing basis, we can capture the changes occurring to the master
data at headquarters and communicate them to the corresponding plant/company.
Figure 4 Sample ALE scenario-distributing master data.

R/3-to-R/3 InterfaceS
Now let’s talk about how to build interfaces between two or more R/3 systems. While the
underlying concepts are almost the same for either R/3-to-R/3 or R/3-to-external system
interfaces, there are important differences in configurations and in the mode of
communications. We will work with an example of distributing characteristics and
classes from one R/3 instance to another. While using objects such as Materials,
Customers, and Vendors, it is often necessary to classify these objects to further describe
their nature and to distinguish them from other objects. In SAP, we use characteristics
and classes to classify objects. Characteristics are attributes that further describe an
object. For example, a chemical’s temperature sensitivity and a customer’s store shelf
square-footage are characteristics of objects that can be maintained in the R/3
classification system. Classes are groups of characteristics that conform to a class type —
such as Material or Vendor. While the term classification data refers to the actual values
of the characteristics, classes and characteristics can be considered configuration data. In
SAP, it is not possible to transport class and characteristic data using the Correction and
Transport System (CTS) across systems (such as development, QA, or production). ALE
provides message types, IDOC types, and function modules to distribute class,
characteristic, and classification data to other systems. Let’s walk through the process of
building an interface to distribute characteristics and classes from one R/3 instance to
another.
The message types available for this purpose are:
CHRMAS — Characteristics master
CLSMAS — Class master
CLFMAS — Classification data.
If you are using the Classification system for master data, such as Materials, Customers,
and Vendors, in addition to distributing the master data, you will need to distribute the
classification data and use the message type CLFMAS. In this example, we’ll focus on
distributing the characteristics and class master using message types CHRMAS and
CLSMAS, respectively; We’ll communicate these messages to another R/3 system using
tRFC, and we’ll learn to configure RFC destinations and R/3 connections. We’ll also
discuss monitoring aspects of tRFC and get to know programs that will confirm the status
of communications. While configuring the Distribution Model, we need to create new
filter objects to distribute only the configuration data created in the Classification system,
because SAP delivers certain characteristics with the system that we do not need to
transport to other systems.
Step 1: Maintaining the Logical System and the Distribution Model. Let’s create a new
LS called CHRCLSR301 that represents the receiving R/3 system.
Here are the steps for configuring the Distribution Model:

• Execute transaction BD64.
• Enter the base LS defined for your client (say, BK1CLNT010). This LS should have
been created and should be allocated to the client using transaction SCC4.
• Enter CHRCLSMODL (as an example) for the name of the Distribution Model.
• Click on Create. You will see a hierarchical listing with BK1CLNT010 as the parent
and all other LSs, including CHRCLSR301, under it.
• After placing the cursor on CHRCLSR301, click on create message type.
• Enter CHRMAS.
• Repeat this operation for CLSMAS.
• If you want to distribute classes pertaining to, for example, Material and Customers
only, then you have the option of specifying a filter object for message type CLSMAS.
One of the object types available is KLART — Class Type. To specify the filter, place
cursor on message type CLSMAS under LS CHRCLSR301. Click on create filter object.
You will see a pop-up screen with open fields Object Type and Object. Pull down the list
of object types (F4), and select KLART. Enter value “001” for class type Materials in the
field Object. Repeat operation for object value “011” for class type Customers.
• SAP delivers certain characteristics that are used throughout the system. We do not
need to transport (distribute) these to the other R/3 system. We need to use a filter object
to restrict the characteristics to perhaps those pertaining to Materials and Customers.
Follow the instructions described in the next section to create new filter object types.
Step 2: Creating new filter object types. Filter objects are criteria used for selecting data
of a particular message type in order to create the required IDOCs. A filter object type is
basically a field on one of the IDOC segments of the IDOC type corresponding to that
message type. We first need to identify the field on the IDOC that can be used for
filtering data. For example, if we use the field ATKLA (Characteristics Group) to group
similar characteristics that we create, then we can use the field to create the filter object
type. Upon scrutinizing the IDOC type CHRMAS01, we find that ATKLA is a field on
the segment E1CABNM (see Figure 5). Further:
Figure 5 Defining a new filter object type.
• From transaction SALE Extensions -> ALE Object Maintenance -> Maintain object
types (for separate message types), select Execute.

• You will see a pop-up screen for message type. Enter CHRMAS.
• Click on new entries.
• Enter ZATKLA (for example) for Object Type, E1CABNM for Segment Type, 1 for
Sequential Number, ATKLA for Field Name, 86 for Byte Offset (from documentation on
IDOC type CHRMAS01), and 10 for Internal Length.
• Save.
Now that we have created a filter object type for use with message type CHRMAS, let’s
complete the configuration of our Customer distribution CHRCLSMODL by executing
transaction BD64:
• Expand the tree for the CHRCLSR301 Logical System.
• Place cursor on message type CHRMAS.
• Click on create filter object.
• Pull down the menu (F4) on field Filter Object Type, and select the object type that we
created—ZATKLA.
• Enter value CUSTOMER in the field Object.
• Repeat this operation and enter MATERIAL in the field Object (see Figure 6).
• Save.
Figure 6 Customer Distribution Model for characteristics and classes.
Note: Menu paths may vary slightly depending on your version of R/3.
Step 3: Creating a CPIC user on target system. To communicate and process messages in
the remote system, SAP uses a user ID on the target system. This user ID needs to be of
type CPIC. Though the user could be a normal dialog user, a user of type CPIC should be
used to preclude performance problems such as “maximum number of logons exceeded.”
Ask your Basis administrator to set up this user ID. Ensure that the ID has all the
authorizations required to update that system’s databases for characteristics and classes.
Step 4: Maintaining the RFC destination. R/3-to-R/3 communication uses tRFC. RFCs
are Remote Function Calls used to invoke function modules for transactional or
asynchronous activities, typically on remote systems. The word transactional prefixed to
RFC merely indicates that particular function is invoked per logical unit of work, which
could be one Material Master, one delivery, or one invoice. SAP tRFC and aRFC
(asynchronous Remote Function Call) both have advanced mechanisms to track data

packet communications and to maintain status. For example, to ensure delivery of data,
tRFCs are “retried” until the calls are successfully completed.
To set up an RFC destination for our interface:
• Execute transaction SM59.
• Place the cursor on R/3 Connections. Click on create.
• Enter the name of the RFC destination, say CHRCLSR301.
• Enter “3” for connection type—this is an R/3 connection.
• Enter a description of the RFC destination.
• Press Enter. You will see a few additional fields appear on the screen.
• Enter the name and system number of the other R/3 server in the field Target Machine.
• Enter logon information such as Client, Language, User ID (the CPIC user ID defined
earlier), and password.
• Save.
• Click on test connection. You will get a list of connection and communication timings
for logon and transfer of a certain number of bytes. This does not verify the password
entered earlier. If the password is incorrect, you will notice system problems on the target
instance.
• Click on remote logon. If you are using a CPIC user ID, there will be no action taken. If
it is a dialog user, you will be logged on to the target system. This is only a test (see
Figure 7, page 90).
Figure 7 Creating an RFC Destination.
It is important to ensure that the name of the LS and the RFC destination are the same.
You can also access this function using SALE -> Communications -> Define RFC
destination.
Step 5: Generating RFC port and partner profile. Here we learn how to generate RFC
ports and partner profiles for an R/3-R/3 interface using SAP functionality. The port

definition is generated based on the RFC destination that we created in the previous step,
while the partner profile is generated based on the Customer Distribution Model we
created, along with the port generated.
Follow these steps to generate these objects:
• Go to SALE (ALE Customizing) -> Communications -> Generate Partner Profiles.
• On the screen that appears, enter the Customer Model CHRCLSMODL as defined
earlier.
• Enter details for receiver of notifications. This is to identify the recipient of workflow
messages in case of errors.
• Switch the Outbound Parameters to Collect IDOCs.
• Switch the Inbound Parameters to Background, so there is no overriding by express
flags.
• Execute.
• You will see a list of messages confirming the generation of a port and partner profile.
The tRFC port has an internally assigned number. If you browse the partner profile
CHRCLSR301 generated in this step, you will notice there are three entries generated for
Outbound Parameters for message types CHRMAS, CLSMAS, and SYNCH. The
message type SYNCH is for synchronous communications between the two R/3 systems
and is used for validation of ALE functions. The port associated with the three outbound
parameters’ entries is the port generated in this step.
The objects created in this process must be generated in the client/instance from which
the communications are originating.
Step 6: Creating a receiving partner profile on the target system. We must now create an
LS and a partner profile for receiving messages from the sending system. This is a mirror
image of the sending LS on the target system.
Here are the steps of the process:
• Create a Logical System BK1CLNT010 on the target system.
• Create a partner profile with partner number BK1CLNT010 on the target system.
• Maintain its Inbound Parameters. Create a new entry for message type CHRMAS, with
process code CHRM, and processing mode Background, with no express override flag.
Create a similar entry for message type CLSMAS, with process code CLSM, and
processing mode Background, with no express override flag.
• Save.
Step 7: Distributing the Customer model. The Customer Distribution Model
CHRCLSMODL was created on the “sender” system. This determines and dictates the
flow of certain message types — CHRMAS and CLSMAS in this case — to other
systems. This information has to be communicated to the recipient system as well, so that

it can accept and process the inbound IDOCs. ALE provides tools to “distribute”
Customer models.
Here are the steps of the process:
• Go to SALE -> Distribution Customer Model -> Distribute Customer Model ->
Distribute Customer Model.
• Specify the Customer Model to be distributed — CHRCLSMODL.
• Specify the Receiving Logical System — CHRCLSR301.
• Execute.
You should receive a message confirming the success of the action. Browse the Customer
Distribution Model on the target system to see that it has been created correctly.
Working the Interface
Now that we have configured the system for an R/3-to-R/3 interface, let’s examine the
methods for executing this interface and for understanding its results. This section will
also go over techniques for monitoring the communications and will discuss performance
issues related to R/3-R/3 ALE communications.
Sending data. SAP provides standard ALE programs for sending and processing IDOCs.
The two programs we are going to use to send data to the target system are RBDSECHR
for sending Characteristics Master and RBDSECLS for sending Class Master. Note that
characteristics data has to be sent before the Class Master, since characteristics belong to
classes — classes are like envelopes for characteristics. As a first step, let’s create the
communication IDOCs on the sending system. To do this:
• Go to BALE Æ Master Data -> Classification System -> Characteristics -> Send. This
is the same as executing program RBDSECHR or transaction BD91.
• Enter the name of the Logical System — CHRCLSR301 in this case.
• Execute.
If the number of characteristics is large, then you should schedule RBDSECHR as a
background job after having defined an appropriate variant. Use transaction WE05 to
view the created IDOCs. They should be in status “30” — IDOC ready for dispatch (ALE
service). Browse the IDOCs to understand and verify the data.
For the Class Master:
• Go to BALE Æ Master Data -> Classification System -> Class -> Send. This is the
same as program RBDSECLS or transaction BD92.
• Enter the class types — 001 for Material and 011 for Customer in this case. Enter the
names of classes you want to distribute. Enter the name of the Logical System —
CHRCLSR301 in this case.
• Execute.

If the number of classes is large, you should schedule program RBDSECLS as a
background job with an appropriate variant. Display the created IDOCs, and browse them
to understand and verify the data.
Dispatching IDOCs to the target system. Once you have created the communication
IDOCs, the next step is to dispatch them to the target system. This is when the tRFC calls
are invoked to connect and communicate to the remote system. Using transaction SM59,
test the connection for RFC destination CHRCLSR301 to ensure that the communication
channels are open and working.
• Go to WEDI -> Test -> Outbound from IDOCs. This is the same as program
RSEOUT00 or transaction WE14.
• Enter the parameters, such as message types (CHRMAS, CLSMAS), partner number of
receiver, and date last created.
• Execute.
If there is a large number of IDOCs, schedule program RSEOUT00 as a background job
with an appropriate variant. After processing, you should find all IDOCs to be in a status
of “03”—Data passed to port OK. Bear in mind that a status of “03” does not necessarily
imply that the tRFC communication was successful. I’ll discuss a method of updating this
status with the results of the final processing later in this section.
Monitoring transactional RFC. While dispatching IDOCs from one R/3 system to another
using tRFC, it is possible to monitor the communications and take appropriate actions to
ensure its success. The main tool is the tRFC monitor, which can be accessed via BALE
-> Monitoring -> Transactional RFC. This is the same as executing transaction SM58 or
program RSARFCRD. Enter the period and user who initiated the RFC. This log displays
only RFC calls that had an error. If there are entries in the log, you can analyze them by
reading the system logs and dumping analysis for that period using transactions SM21
and ST22 successively. Carefully analyze these errors to take the correct action. The R/3
Connection may not be active, or the user may not have the necessary authorization for
creating entries in the target system. If the problems are other than certain mandatory
settings, most RFC transactions should get processed within a small period of time. In
case of errors in communication, you may find several jobs in the Job Overview
(transaction SM37) with a prefix ARFC. These are normal, since the system is scheduling
jobs to reprocess the RFC transactions. However, an excessive number of such jobs could
bog down the system, since all batch processors would get flooded, resulting in a
repetitive loop causing more jobs to be created. The status records of RFC calls sent from
the system are stored in table ARFCSSTATE, while those of RFC calls on the receiver
system are stored in table ARFCRSTATE.
Processing IDOCs on the target system. When the IDOCs arrive on the target system
from the host machine, they are created with a status of “64” — IDOC ready to be passed
to application. This is because we chose the option of “background” on the target system,
rather than processing them immediately. We now need to run a program that will
process these IDOCs and post the data to the application. To do this:

• Go to BALE -> Periodic Work -> ALE Inbound IDOCs. Choose the radio button for
“64” — IDOC ready to be passed to application. Execute. This is the same as executing
program RBDAPP01.
• In the panel displayed, enter parameters such as message type (CHRMAS and
CLSMAS in this case), creation date, or IDOC numbers. Execute.
• A list will be displayed indicating the status of the processing.
Also check the status of the IDOCs, using transaction WE02 or WE05. All IDOCs must
have a status of “53”—Application document posted.
If workflow has been set up, you will receive work items in your inbox in case of errors.
There you can edit the IDOCs if the errors are related to data and then reprocess them.
However, in case of application errors, you can check the logs to determine the cause of
these errors and take remedial action.
The necessary steps include:
• Execute transaction SLG1.
• Enter CAPI for Object (Classification system) and CAPI_LOG for Subobject. If
necessary, enter time restrictions and user information. Execute.
• You will see a display of errors pertaining to characteristics, and you will also see log
messages for all successful class (CLSMAS) transactions.
In case of errors due to system availability, deadlocks, or temporal data problems, it is
possible to schedule program RBDMANIN in the background to reprocess the IDOCs in
a status of “51” — Error: Application document not posted.
How does the sending system know that the tRFC calls to the remote system were successful? There is a
program you can execute that collects information about the result of the tRFC calls on the remote system
and reports the information to the host client.
To do this:
• Go to BALE -> Periodic Work -> Check IDOC Dispatch. This is the same as executing program
RBDMOIND or transaction BD75.
• Enter the IDOC creation date and the number of IDOCs after which the process can be committed, say
100. This implies that after checking the status of 100 IDOCs, the program will update its status.
If the tRFC calls were successful, the aforementioned process should update the status of the IDOCs
dispatched to “12” — Dispatch OK.
IDoc Inbound Reports Described
Written by Kevin Wilson
The following is a short list of key reports that process inbound IDocs. They are
sometimes usefull to have run in a batch mode.

1) RBDMANIN - Start Error Handling for Non-Posted IDocs
Description: This report attempts to post the inbound IDocs with status '51' (Application
document not posted)
2) RBDAGAIN - Process Outbound IDocs with Errors Again
Description: This report reprocesses outbound IDocs which contain errors. IDocs
containing errors have one of the following statuses:
• 02: Error transmitting data to port
• 04: Error in EDI subsystem control information
• 05: Error in conversion
• 25: Continue processing despite syntax error (outbound)
• 29: Error in ALE service
3) RBDAGAIE - Reprocessing of Edited IDocs
Description: This report reprocesses an edited IDoc in inbound or outbound processing.
The edited IDoc has one of the following statuses:
• 32: IDoc edited (outbound)
• 69: IDoc edited (inbound)
4) RBDAGAI2 - Re-processing of IDocs after ALE Input Error
Description: You use this report to reprocess inbound IDocs containing errors. IDocs
containing errors have one of the following statuses:
• 56: IDoc containing errors added
• 61: Continue processing despite syntax error (inbox)
• 63: Error passing IDoc to the application
• 65: Error in ALE service
5) RBDAPP01 - Inbound Processing of IDocs Ready for Transfer
Description: Report for processing inbound IDocs not passed to the application
immediately. This report forwards all IDocs with:
• Status 64 "ready to be passed to application"
• Status 66 "IDoc is waiting for predecessor IDoc (serialization)

What is the difference between ALE, EDI, IDocs and BAPI?
(http://searchsap.techtarget.com/expert/KnowledgebaseAnswer/0,289625,sid21_gci8
79631,00.html)
The interface concept of the classic R/3 is based on two different strategies: Remote
Function Calls (RFC) and data exchange through IDoc message documents. RFC makes
direct and synchronous calls of a program in the remote system. If the caller is an
external program it will call an RFC-enabled function in R/3 and if the calling program is
the R/3 system it will call an RFC-function in another R/3-system or it will call a non-R/3
program through a gateway-proxy (usually rfcexec.exe). BAPIs are a subset of the RFC-
enabled function modules, especially designed as Application Programming Interface
(API) to the SAP business object, or in other words: are function modules officially
released by SAP to be called from external programs.
IDocs are text encoded documents with a rigid structure that are used to exchange data
between R/3 and a foreign system. Instead of calling a program in the destination system
directly, the data is first packed into an IDoc and then sent to the receiving system, where
it is analyzed and properly processed. Therefore an IDoc data exchange is always an
asynchronous process. The significant difference between simple RFC-calls and IDoc
data exchange is the fact, that every action performed on IDocs are protocolled by R/3
and IDocs can be reprocessed if an error occurred in one of the message steps.
While IDocs have to be understood as a data exchange protocol, EDI and ALE are typical
use cases for IDocs. R/3 uses IDocs for both EDI and ALE to deliver data to the receiving
system. ALE is basically the scheduling mechanism that defines when and between
which partners and what kind of data will be exchanged on a regular or event triggered
basis. Such a set-up is called an ALE-scenario.
The philosophical difference between EDI and ALE can be pinned as follows: If we send
data to an external partner, we generally speak of EDI, while ALE is a mechanism to
reliable replicate data between trusting systems to store a redundant copy of the IDoc
data. The difference is made clear, when we think of a purchase order that is sent as an
IDoc. If we send the purchase order to a supplier then the supplier will store the purchase
order as a sales order. However, if we send the purchase order via ALE to another R/3
system, then the receiving system will store the purchase order also as a purchase order.

Data Exchange via IDoc with ALE or EDI
(https://www.sdn.sap.com/irj/sdn/ale#section2)
IDoc or Intermediate Document is a standard SAP document exchange format. IDocs
allow different application systems to be linked via a message-based interface. The IDoc
interface consists of the definition of a data structure (where the data structure is the
IDoc) and a processing logic for this data structure. There are three main aims behind the
use of IDocs:
• The structured exchange of business documents so that they can be processed
automatically.
• The various degrees of structural complexity as displayed by different application
systems can be reduced to a structure which is as simple as possible.
Example: The structure of an SAP application document and the structure of the
corresponding EDI message under the UN/EDIFACT standard.
• IDocs allow for extensive exception handling before the data is posted to the
application.
The following techniques use the IDoc interface to exchange business data between
different systems:
• Electronic Data Interchange (EDI) was the first form of data transfer to use
IDocs. In EDI application scenarios, the processes, by definition, involve two
partners: The sender and the recipient of an EDI message. EDI is a bilateral,
document-oriented form of data transfer.
• Application Link Enabling (ALE) enables integration of business processes that
are developed across several SAP systems or non-SAP systems. Thus, ALE is
oriented to connect different applications on different systems. System-wide ALE
message flows are modeled in a so called 'distribution model'.
A typical scenario is the system data administration, where material master
records have to be distributed from one central to several satellite systems.
Nowadays, pure EDI scenarios are more and more executed on the basis of ALE
technology, only that the system connection is 'just' bilateral.
You find detailed information on ALE under the following links:
• Literature
• Presentations
• Frequently Asked Questions
• Certifiable Interfaces
• Important Links

EDI/IDoc: How is an EDI project carried out?
Note Number 0047071
Released on 29.01.1997
Release
Symptom
How should you go about an EDI project? What steps are required?
Additional key words
IDoc, EDI, EDIFACT, ANSI X12, ODETTE, VDA
Cause and preconditions
Solution
When executing an EDI project, different aspects must be considered. The expense for
such a project must be determined on an individual basis, as such projects are customer-
specific and require a lot of consultation.
The following aspects are involved in an EDI project:
1. Selection of business partners
You must choose the business partners involved in the EDI. The EDI standard to be used
and the messages to be exchanged must be the same for all partners.
1. Selection of the EDI Subsystem
An EDI Subsystem (translator, converter) is required to convert the SAP format IDoc into
the message format of an EDI Standard. You must select a corresponding product. The
IDoc interface is open, so that various EDI Subsystems can be added.
SAP does not offer any EDI subsystem itself!
Within our Authentication Program (Complementary Software Program CSP), SAP has
certified some of these systems. Please note here, that this is a purely technical and
functional authentication of the interface. That is, we test whether IDocs can be sent and
received and whether a status report is created for sent IDocs. The authentication is not a
business-based, functional test.
1. Implementation of the EDI procedure
You are recommended here to follow four steps:
a. Complete implementation of the SAP application
b. Internal SAP test of the IDoc interface
c. Test the IDoc interface with the EDI Subsystem
d. Start production
In particular the internal SAP test of the IDoc interface great attention is be dedicated
since he allows in a very early stage to recognize errors and lacks of implementation.
Complete implementation of SAP application
Before you start implementing the EDI or IDoc functionality, the affected SAP
applications must be implemented and their functionality must be available.
Internal SAP test of the IDoc interface
The test is made up of a combination of the technical, functional test as well as the
business-based, functional test.

Technical, functional test
Here, you should test whether IDocs from the SAP application are created and that they
can be transferred to the file system (Outbound processing). Furthermore, you should test
whether IDocs are copied in the file system and can be processed by the SAP application
(Inbound processing).
The individual steps can be supported with test tools:
Output: Test from the NAST record (message control for MM and SD) with transaction
WE15. An application document must previously be created in the application. Output:
Test from the IDoc with transaction WE14. An application document must previously be
created in the application. Inbox: Test from a formally correct inbound file with
transaction WE16. The file can be made available first, or must be manually created with
an editor in the usual way. Inbox: Test from an outbound file with transaction WE12. The
file comes from one of the two named output tests. Inbox: Test from IDoc, including
manual creation of the IDocs, with transaction WE19 (only from Release 3.1).
Business-based, functional test
For the created output IDocs, you must check that the IDoc contains all the data that was
agreed on with the partner. This means that the data must be checked and compared field
by field. If differences are found, proceed as follows:
Can the data be produced by maintaining the basic data (customer, vendor, material or
information record)? Can the data be produced by additional input in the transactions for
the documents (purchase order, order, etc)? Is the corresponding application function that
processes this data available at all?
You should, of course, proceed in the same way for incoming IDocs. However, this check
can be made using the SAP application. This decides, whether the data is sufficient to
create or change an application document. Exceptions which cause notification via the
SAP Business Workflow are triggered if necessary.
In the tests, you should also check that these notifications reach the correct people.
Once the tests described here have been completed and were successful, you can start
connecting the EDI subsystem.
Test the IDoc interface with the EDI Subsystem
With the EDI Subsystem, you must conduct both local and remote tests.
Local test
In the local test of outgoing messages, you must ensure that the EDI messages created
from the IDocs are in accordance with your partner. Via transaction WE17, you should
also test that the status report of the EDI subsystem contains the required information on
the initial IDocs and that exceptions are forwarded to the correct people.
For incoming messages, you should check that the IDocs created from these messages
can be processed by the SAP application. That is, the corresponding application
documents can be created or changed.
Remote test
With the remote test, you should pay attention to the communication with the partner as
well as the processing of the messages by the respective partner system.
Please note, that many EDI standards allow messages to be transferred in a test mode.
Thus, you can test the chain of processing, transmission and further processing and
distinguish these messages from "productive" messages at the same time.

The test mode is indicated in the IDoc in the control record in the field TEST. In the EDI
standard EDIFACT, this is made clear in the service segment UNB, data element 0035,
and in the EDI standard ANSI X12, in the service segment ISA, data element I14.
For SAP, it is entered in the partner profile for output. In the input, it is the key field of
the partner profile, so that the business processes can also be controlled by this.
Start production
The productive phase of the EDI application may only be started if the tests were
completed successfully.
The tests here represent the minimum requirements for a successful EDI project. Further
information can be obtained from the National Standardization Office (in Germany, the
DIN) or through your EDI consulting partner.
Source code corrections
Related notes
0032121 EDI/IDoc: Workflow in the EDI and IDoc basis
0041365 EDI/IDoc: Certified EDI subsystems for 3.0 and 3.1
0044416 EDI/IDoc: Messages from IDoc processing
0114714 EDI/IDoc: Certified EDI subsystems for 4.x
0116610 EDI/IDoc: Notifications from IDoc processing
Wikipedia: EDIFACT
United Nations/Electronic Data Interchange For Administration, Commerce, and
Transport (UN/EDIFACT) is the international EDI standard developed under the
United Nations. The work of maintenance and further development of this standard is
done through the United Nations Centre for Trade Facilitation and Electronic Business
(UN/CEFACT) under the UN Economic Commission for Europe, in the Finance Domain
working group UN CEFACT TBG5. EDIFACT has been adopted by the International
Organization for Standardization (ISO) as the ISO standard ISO 9735.
The EDIFACT standard provides
• A set of syntax rules to structure data,
• An interactive exchange protocol (I-EDI),
• Standard messages which allow multi-country and multi-industry exchange.

Example
See below for an example of an EDIFACT message used to answer to a product
availability request:
UNB+IATB:1+6XPPC+LHPPC+940101:0950+1’
UNH+1+PAORES:93:1:IA’
MSG+1:45’
IFT+3+XYZCOMPANY AVAILABILITY’
ERC+A7V:1:AMD’
IFT+3+NO MORE FLIGHTS’
ODI’
TVL+240493:1000::1220+FRA+JFK+DL+400+C’
PDI++C:3+Y::3+F::1’
APD+74C:0:::6++++++6X’
TVL+240493:1740::2030+JFK+MIA+DL+081+C'
PDI++C:4’
APD+EM2:0:1630::6+++++++DA’
UNT+13+1’
UNZ+1+1’
• ' is a segment terminator
• + is a data element separator
• : is a component data element separator
• ? is a release character
Note: The line breaks after each segment in this example have been added for readability.
There are typically no line breaks in EDI data.
UNH+1+PAORES:93:1:IA’- This is the header segment which is required at the start of
every message. This code specifies that the message name and version is PAORES 93
revision 1 and it was defined by the organisation IA (IATA).
IFT+3+NO MORE FLIGHTS’ - This is an 'Interactive Free Text' segment containing the text
'NO MORE FLIGHTS'
UNT+13+1’ - This is the tail segment. It indicated that the message sent contains 13
segments.
Structure
EDIFACT has a hierarchical structure where the top level is referred to as an
interchange, and lower levels contain multiple messages which consist of segments,
which in turn consist of composites. The final iteration is an element which is derived
from the United Nations Trade Data Element Directory (UNTDED) and are normalised
throughout the EDIFACT standard.

Edi idoc interface-ale-bapi-badi-user exits

Edi idoc interface-ale-bapi-badi-user exits

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (20)

Similar to Edi idoc interface-ale-bapi-badi-user exits

Similar to Edi idoc interface-ale-bapi-badi-user exits (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Edi idoc interface-ale-bapi-badi-user exits