|
Home > Archive > BizTalk Server General > July 2004 > Multiple Records Mapping Issue
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
Multiple Records Mapping Issue
|
|
| Emilie Delaplace 2004-07-09, 3:31 pm |
| Hi,
I'd like to map these 2 schemas:
TREATMENTS TREATMENT
Comments Name
TREATMENT Code
Name Comments
Code
In the source schema, the TREATMENTS record is single or null, whereas the Min Occur of TREATMENT is 0 and the Max Occur is unbounded.
In the destination schema, the TREATMENT occurs can accur between 0 and unlimited.
When I directly link Comments -> Comments, Name -> Name, Code -> Code, I have the expected result, as soon as there is at least one TREATMENT record in the source schema. However, when I have only the field Comments with data in the source instance, I don
't obtain in the destination a record with Name empty, Code empty, and Comments with the Comments data, instead I obtain an empty TREATMENT record.
I tried different mappings to achieve the expected result, but without success. Any suggestion would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks,
Emilie
| |
| Tan Bao Nguyen 2004-07-09, 3:31 pm |
| Emilie,
Use a logical functoid and check if TREATMENT record is present; and then
link the logical functoid to the value mapping functoid. If the Name and
Code fields are not present then return an empty value in the value mapping
functoid.
Regards,
Tan Nguyen
Microsoft BizTalk Server
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rigts.
--------------------[vbcol=seagreen]
Delaplace@discussions.microsoft.com>[vbcol=seagreen]
the Min Occur of TREATMENT is 0 and the Max Occur is unbounded.[vbcol=seagreen]
unlimited.[vbcol=seagreen]
have the expected result, as soon as there is at least one TREATMENT record
in the source schema. However, when I have only the field Comments with
data in the source instance, I don't obtain in the destination a record
with Name empty, Code empty, and Comments with the Comments data, instead I
obtain an empty TREATMENT record.[vbcol=seagreen]
success. Any suggestion would be greatly appreciated.[vbcol=seagreen]
| |
| Emilie Delaplace 2004-07-09, 3:31 pm |
| I tried that, but it does not do what I expect. Indeed what I would like is to obtain :
1/ When some TREATMENT records exist in the source, with an input like:
<TREATMENTS Comments="Comments_0">
<TREATMENT name="name_0" code="code_1" />
<TREATMENT name="name_2" code="code_3" />
<TREATMENT name="name_4" code="code_5" />
</TREATMENTS>
the output should be:
<TREATMENT name="name_0" code="code_1" comment="Comments_0" />
<TREATMENT name="name_2" code="code_3" comment="Comments_0" />
<TREATMENT name="name_4" code="code_5" comment="Comments_0" />
2/ When there is no TREATMENT reord in the source but just a comment, with an input like:
<TREATMENTS Comments="Comments_0">
</TREATMENTS>
the output should be:
<TREATMENT comment="Comments_0" />
Whereas, in the second case, I am unsuccessfull, because I can't obtain the record TREATMENT and the field comment.
If you have any idea, it will be very helpful.
"Tan Bao Nguyen" wrote:
> Emilie,
>
> Use a logical functoid and check if TREATMENT record is present; and then
> link the logical functoid to the value mapping functoid. If the Name and
> Code fields are not present then return an empty value in the value mapping
> functoid.
>
> Regards,
> Tan Nguyen
> Microsoft BizTalk Server
>
> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rigts.
>
> --------------------
> Delaplace@discussions.microsoft.com>
> the Min Occur of TREATMENT is 0 and the Max Occur is unbounded.
> unlimited.
> have the expected result, as soon as there is at least one TREATMENT record
> in the source schema. However, when I have only the field Comments with
> data in the source instance, I don't obtain in the destination a record
> with Name empty, Code empty, and Comments with the Comments data, instead I
> obtain an empty TREATMENT record.
> success. Any suggestion would be greatly appreciated.
>
>
|
|
|
|
|