What are the main differences between ANSI X12 and UN/EDIFACT standards for WMS communication?

1 What is EDI?

EDI is a method of transferring structured data between different systems or organizations without human intervention. EDI can be used for various business transactions, such as orders, invoices, shipping notices, inventory updates, and more. EDI can reduce errors, costs, and delays, and improve efficiency and accuracy. However, EDI requires that both parties agree on a common format and syntax for the data, which is where standards like ANSI X12 and UN/EDIFACT come in.

2 What is ANSI X12?

ANSI X12 is a standard developed by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) in 1979. It defines the structure, content, and format of EDI messages for various industries and sectors, such as retail, transportation, health care, finance, and government. ANSI X12 consists of a set of documents called transaction sets, which specify the data elements and segments for each type of transaction. For example, the transaction set 940 is used for warehouse shipping orders, and the transaction set 945 is used for warehouse shipping advice.

3 What is UN/EDIFACT?

UN/EDIFACT is a standard developed by the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UN/ECE) in 1987. It is an international standard that aims to harmonize the EDI practices of different countries and regions. UN/EDIFACT defines the structure, content, and format of EDI messages for various domains and applications, such as trade, transport, finance, and administration. UN/EDIFACT consists of a set of documents called messages, which specify the data elements and segments for each type of transaction. For example, the message ORDERS is used for purchase orders, and the message DESADV is used for despatch advice.

4 How do they differ?

ANSI X12 and UN/EDIFACT have some similarities and some differences. Both standards use a similar structure of data elements and segments, but they differ in the syntax and the naming of the elements and segments. For example, ANSI X12 uses a fixed-length format with delimiters to separate the elements and segments, while UN/EDIFACT uses a variable-length format with indicators to mark the end of the elements and segments. Also, ANSI X12 uses numeric codes to identify the elements and segments, while UN/EDIFACT uses alphanumeric codes to identify them.

Another difference is the scope and coverage of the standards. ANSI X12 is more focused on the North American market and the specific needs of different industries and sectors. UN/EDIFACT is more global and generic, and tries to accommodate the diverse requirements of different countries and regions. Therefore, ANSI X12 has more transaction sets than UN/EDIFACT, but UN/EDIFACT has more messages that can be used across different domains and applications.

5 What are the pros and cons?

When considering which standard to use for WMS communication, it's important to consider the pros and cons of both ANSI X12 and UN/EDIFACT. ANSI X12 is more widely used in the US and Canada, and has more industry-specific transaction sets which may be better suited to your WMS communication needs. However, it is less flexible and adaptable to changes and new requirements, and may not be compatible with other countries or regions that use different standards. On the other hand, UN/EDIFACT is more widely used in Europe and other parts of the world, with more generic messages that can be applied to different domains and applications. It is also more flexible and adaptable to changes and new requirements, and can be easily extended or customized. Nevertheless, UN/EDIFACT is less standardized and consistent, which may require more mapping and conversion to match your WMS communication.

6 How to choose?

The choice between ANSI X12 and UN/EDIFACT depends on several factors, such as your WMS communication goals, your trading partners, your industry or sector, your budget, and your technical capabilities. You may also need to consider other standards or protocols that are relevant to your WMS communication, such as XML, JSON, or AS2. Ultimately, the best standard for your WMS communication is the one that meets your expectations and requirements, and that enables you to exchange data with your partners efficiently and effectively.

7 Here’s what else to consider

This is a space to share examples, stories, or insights that don’t fit into any of the previous sections. What else would you like to add?