BMEcat - mandatory to include all EFs in PRODUCT_FEATURES?

Last comment 03/09/2019 10:38 by Karl
· Mark as unread
Roberto Ortega 1 month ago created
Hello!

I hope everyone's vacation went well :) I know the question of my topic title is already answered in the BMEcat guidelines ("If a product is assigned to an ETIM class, all attributed features of this class have to be transmitted in the BMEcat file"). However, we are finding some manufacturers who only send the features that they have been able to fill in the BMEcat file. For example, most of the luminaire classes have around 80-100 features, and if for example a manufacturer has been able to fill around 25 features per product, sending only the filled features can drastically reduce the BMEcat generation time as well as the BMEcat file size (thus making it easier to share).

I  also understand that ETIM is a standard with a certain structure and that it is to be expressed by all manufacturers uniformly, that's why all the features must be informed - but in the case of performance issues due to a very large BMEcat that is due to many "uninformed" features, in some cases is it possible to send the BMEcat only with the informed features?

Thanks very much,

Roberto
Karl Pappas 1 month ago created
Hi Roberto,
we have discussed this topic many times in the last 10-15 years. But it is still like it is not to change something in existing processes. But we are discussing how to deal with data supply in the future (formats, etc.) and then a new decision can be made. 
But anyway, if a data supplier wants to deliver only used values, he can do that if the data receiver agrees. Then the file is not correct according the ETIM Guideline, but if it works, they can do that.
Karl
Join the conversation
You have to be a registered user to join the conversation.
Topic started 30 August 2019 at 10:11
Reader count 9
Comment count 2