Specifying schemas with null UNH2.5 values can cause issues

[sweeeneey]

I am decoding a message with no UNH2.5 value.

Initially, I had mistakenly entered an UNH2.5 value in the agreement GUI. I removed the value, also with the GUI. However, rather than removing the associationAssignedCode property from the JSON definition entirely, the GUI sets the property to an empty string.

While associationAssignedCode is set to an empty string, the decode does not function. When attempting to decode the message the following is returned:

"exception": "Transaction Set Errors\r\n\r\nSequence No: 1\r\nTS Id code: INVRPT\r\nControl Number: 4381\r\n\r\nError: 1 (Miscellaneous error)\r\n\t70: The message has an unknown document type and did not resolve to any of the existing schemas configured in the agreement.\r\n\r\nError: 2 (Miscellaneous error)\r\n\t71: Transaction Set or Group Control Number Mismatch\r\n\r\nError: 3 (Miscellaneous error)\r\n\t29: Invalid count specified at interchange, group, or message levels",

It is not readily apparent what the issue is from the error. The error is resolved if the associationAssignedCode property is removed from the JSON definition.

Works: { "messageId": "INVRPT", "messageVersion": "D", "messageRelease": "96A", "schemaName": "EFACT_D96A_INVRPT" }

Doesn't work: { "messageId": "INVRPT", "messageVersion": "D", "messageRelease": "96A", "associationAssignedCode": "", "schemaName": "EFACT_D96A_INVRPT" }

---

Document Details

⚠ Do not edit this section. It is required for docs.microsoft.com ➟ GitHub issue linking.

• ID: 88d78f8b-70f9-e33e-ef1b-00f2c39035f1
• Version Independent ID: 8026e376-b340-da82-460a-9114ed616fba
• Content: UNH 2.5 segments in EDIFACT messages - Azure Logic Apps
• Content Source: articles/logic-apps/logic-apps-enterprise-integration-edifact_inputfile_unh2.5.md
• Service: logic-apps
• GitHub Login: @divyaswarnkar
• Microsoft Alias: divswa

[mike-urnun-msft]

@sweeeneey Thank you for your feedback! We will review and update as appropriate.

[PramodValavala-MSFT]

@sweeeneey Thanks for catching this and sharing the workaround! We have shared the feedback with the concerning team who will be address this.

We are assigning this issue to the author for further review.

[ecfan]

@divyaswarnkar, could you please respond?

[ecfan]

@divyaswarnkar, please respond?

[ecfan]

I've created a work item to prioritize, track, and address, thanks!

@PramodValavala-MSFT: #please-close