Skip to content

Maintain & offer OTM5-endpoints for code lists #27

@BobZuidhoek

Description

@BobZuidhoek

I'd like to add something to the OTM 5 spec.

What would you like to add or change to the specification? Please be as clear and concise as possible.

Within Transport Orders (and its relating context such as Goods, Location, etc.) a handful of code lists are used to populate fields. I would like to see that OTM maintains these code lists in a central place and offers API's to download (sync) the code list to local systems (e.g. TMS, ERP).

The desired way is that we position the code lists as advisory code lists (to promote standardization).

A couple of code lists come to mind...

A code list for list for tertiary & secondary packaging
This would be the code list for the PackagingMaterial / EquipmentType / EquipmentSubtype attribute in Goods.

This is the code list for things like pallets, trolleys, crates, carton, box, etc. They can be one-way packaging, but also RTI (Returnable/Reusable Transport Items). If this is not standardized and we would, for example, want to communicate a 120x80 Euro pallet, different codings like "EPAL", "Europallet", "EPAL120x80", "Euro", etc pass by. It makes sense that a OTM-standardized list is kept for this. This ensures proper and quick mapping of messages from and to internal company systems.

The challenge with this particular code list is that several code lists exist, that all complement each other.

So for this list, OTM should take a leading role in maintaining the content of the code list.

Other code lists should be maintained & downloadable via API for completeness and ensuring standardization

  • List of IncoTerms
  • List of 2-code countries (based on ISO-3166)
  • Currencies (based on ISO 4217)
  • Unit of measure types (cm, kg, etc.) maybe based on code list 6411 as used in EDI
  • DocumentTypes (Photo, CMR, Commercial invoice, Customs Invoice, etc.). I don't know if some standardized list already exists.

Describe alternatives you've considered
None. Particularly packaging codes are hard to standardize if not not centrally maintained.

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    OTM 5.3This ticket is included in OTM 5.3enhancementNew feature or request

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

    Milestone

    Relationships

    None yet

    Development

    No branches or pull requests

    Issue actions