Ampersand ‘&’ in PID segments

[Ed Hafner]

Looking for a little help and guidance.

We have users that put ‘&’ characters in Address fields.  I’ve noticed a few things:

       – If the ‘&’ is in the NK1 segment, there is no problem.  The messages come through without an issue.

       – If the ‘&’ is in the PID segment, the message is suppressed.

What I’d like to do is have the PID segment not cause an issue and allow the message to continue through the route to the outbound thread.  If the character is ignored in the NK1, can we get Cloverleaf to ignore it in the PID.

This message is from the inbound system and does not make it through the route to the outbound thread:

0(0).MSH(0).#9(0)  :  >ADT^A31< 0(0).MSH(0).#10(0)  :  >62963_16_RE< 0(0).MSH(0).#11(0)  :  >P< 0(0).MSH(0).#12(0)  :  >2.4< 0(0).MSH(0).#18(0)  :  >ASCII< 0(0).EVN(0).#1(0)  :  >A31< 0(0).EVN(0).#2(0)  :  >201305211043< 0(0).EVN(0).#5(0)  :  >HAFNEREMTST< 0(0).PID(0).#1(0)  :  >1< 0(0).PID(0).#3(0)  :  >800000< 0(0).PID(0).#5(0)  :  >BURGESS^BUCKWHEAT^^^^< 0(0).PID(0).#7(0)  :  >19121212< 0(0).PID(0).#8(0)  :  >M< 0(0).PID(0).#10(0)  :  >2054-5< 0(0).PID(0).#11(0)  :  >ABC & 123 STREET^””^GLENS FALLS^NY^12801^USA< 0(0).PID(0).#13(0)  :  >5184441112< 0(0).PID(0).#14(0)  :  >5187932541< 0(0).PID(0).#16(0)  :  >S< 0(0).PID(0).#22(0)  :  >2< 0(0).PID(0).#29(0)  :  >””< 1(0).PD1(0).#4(0)  :  >306^SOLOMON^JOEL^^^^< 2(0).NK1(0).#1(0)  :  >1< 2(0).NK1(0).#2(0)  :  >BURGESS^BETTY^^^^< 2(0).NK1(0).#3(0)  :  >NCH< 2(0).NK1(0).#4(0)  :  >101 SATURDAY NIGHT DRIVE^FIRST & MAIN & & SECOND^GLENS FALLS^NY^12801< 2(0).NK1(0).#5(0)  :  >5184441112< 2(0).NK1(0).#7(0)  :  >CP< The only indication of an issue in the log is: [xpm :xlt :WARN/0:adttest_xlate:05/21/2013 10:43:52] IF data fetch produced multiple values. [xlt :xlat:ERR /0:adttest_xlate:05/21/2013 10:43:52] [0.0.38819422] Xlate ‘idx_to_Epic_ADT.xlt’ failed: Fetch failure on ‘{IF data fetch produced multiple values.}’ This ‘XLT’ is on only 1 of the routes that have an issue. This message is successfully sent through the route to the outbound thread: 0(0).MSH(0).#1(0)  :  >|< 0(0).MSH(0).#2(0)  :  >^~&< 0(0).MSH(0).#7(0)  :  >201305211010< 0(0).MSH(0).#9(0)  :  >ADT^A31< 0(0).MSH(0).#10(0)  :  >62963_14_RE< 0(0).MSH(0).#11(0)  :  >P< 0(0).MSH(0).#12(0)  :  >2.4< 0(0).MSH(0).#18(0)  :  >ASCII< 0(0).EVN(0).#1(0)  :  >A31< 0(0).EVN(0).#2(0)  :  >201305211010< 0(0).EVN(0).#5(0)  :  >HAFNEREMTST< 0(0).PID(0).#1(0)  :  >1< 0(0).PID(0).#3(0)  :  >800000< 0(0).PID(0).#5(0)  :  >BURGESS^BUCKWHEAT^^^^< 0(0).PID(0).#7(0)  :  >19121212< 0(0).PID(0).#8(0)  :  >M< 0(0).PID(0).#10(0)  :  >2054-5< 0(0).PID(0).#11(0)  :  >ABC 123 STREET^””^GLENS FALLS^NY^12801^USA< 0(0).PID(0).#13(0)  :  >5184441112< 0(0).PID(0).#14(0)  :  >5187932541< 0(0).PID(0).#16(0)  :  >S< 0(0).PID(0).#22(0)  :  >2< 0(0).PID(0).#29(0)  :  >””< 1(0).PD1(0).#4(0)  :  >306^SOLOMON^JOEL^^^^< 2(0).NK1(0).#1(0)  :  >1< 2(0).NK1(0).#2(0)  :  >BURGESS^BETTY^^^^< 2(0).NK1(0).#3(0)  :  >NCH< 2(0).NK1(0).#4(0)  :  >101 SATURDAY NIGHT DRIVE^FIRST & MAIN & & SECOND^GLENS FALLS^NY^12801< 2(0).NK1(0).#5(0)  :  >5184441112< 2(0).NK1(0).#7(0)  :  >CP<

Topic

[David Barr]

Ampersand is the subcomponent delimiter. If it appears literally in a message, then it needs to be sent as an escape sequence: T. If the interface that is sending to these messages is not properly escaping the delimiters, then maybe you need to write an inbound message TPS proc that replaces the ampersand in MSH-2 with an unused character. Alternatively your TPS proc could replace ampersands in the PID segment with T.

[Author]

Replies