xlates vs raw routes with tcl procs

This topic has 1 reply, 2 voices, and was last updated 15 years ago by Keith McLeod.

Creator

Topic
December 11, 2009 at 6:27 pm #51423
herm ernst
Participant
What are the advantages, if any, to using xlates instead of raw routes with tcl procs to do message translations?

I have mutiple ADT message types (A01-A16) where one tcl proc could handle the edits or should I create xlates for each message type? Some, not all of the messages will need variants created also.
Creator

Topic

Viewing 0 reply threads

Author

Replies
- December 11, 2009 at 7:50 pm #70230
  Keith McLeod
  Participant
  This is a matter of preference. I like to have the rule of not manipulating messages in the tps inbound or prexlate if it can be avoided. This allows you to view the inbound SMAT files to know what fields you are actually going to work with. I use these locations to filter out messages.
  
  I then manipulate the message in an xlate. If you don’t want to have multiple xlates consider using the wild card route with a single xlate. This may require a generic structure be established in a variant. I would also suggest using the latest variants since most fields have been added.
  
  Hope this helps…..
Author

Replies

Viewing 0 reply threads

The forum ‘Cloverleaf’ is closed to new topics and replies.