Clearing Review Messages for Number of Items/Pallet

[lvanhouten]

Hi - 

My items in "Review" status on my dashboard is growing (growl). In reviewing the messages, there are still quite a few for the Number of Items/Pallet.  How can I get these cleared out when the requested information is present and the records have been republished (multiple times)? For most of these with this Review message, the Last Recipient Response (CIC) State Date is in 2021.

Example GTIN:  10026700795142

[lvanhouten]

@CommunityJedi22  - interesting you say that. For other publications with them (not in review status), CIC's have not been received. So I asked if they normally send CIC's when publications have been received or synchronized and their response:  Interesting you ask, I generally don’t receive the notifications (or send CICs) for publications within 1WS data pool.  I am going to ask them about it.  I am working with them now because the CIC process has been broken between 1WS and our manufacturers who use other data pools. 

Can CIC's messages get sent automatically by 1WS based on validation rules?  Since this customer does not send CIC's - where did the REVIEW CIC's come from?

[CommunityJedi22]

Hello @lvanhouten those are all great points.  The Review messages in place are a CIC999 which is a custom error from recipients.  There are times we make customizations to CICs for certain recipient or GDN requirements so let me see if that is happening here.  As an FYI, I have talked to quite a few folks on my end today about this and will continue to do so.

[CommunityJedi22]

Hello @lvanhouten, thank you for your patience.  I talked to quite a few people about this yesterday and with our Product team this morning.  I learned that this is actually a Warning CIC999, as you and I suspected, that is generated from IM and not the recipient.  Our team has been working on a way to resolve these errors as modifies and republishging to not override the CIC unless your trading partner sends a new one.  

I understand now that we were actually trying to get a fix for this issue added as part of the large release this coming Saturday, May 20 but am not sure if that fix made it.  Do you mind if I ask you to take a look on Monday, say after lunch, and let me know if you see any changes?  If not I will see if it will make it in the next release.

[lvanhouten]

Yep, I can absolutely review these on Monday. Will keep you posted on what I find.

Any information on question #2? 

[CommunityJedi22]

Yes, sorry, I thought I covered this one:  Can CIC's messages get sent automatically by 1WS based on validation rules?  Since this customer does not send CIC's - where did the REVIEW CIC's come from?

Yes, a few years ago 1WS implemented auto-CICs from IM that look like they come from a recipe for certain validations related to new validations being implemented, like this one.

[lvanhouten]

Thanks for that clarification. I was actually talking about this question #2... 😀

Can you also help clarify what this attribute represents - I am getting conflicting responses from customers. 

Is this the total number of the lowest level item on a pallet (ti/hi 14x4 and there are 3 jugs in a case = 168).

Or does it need to be different quantities at each hierarchy level?  Case records, it's how many cases are on a pallet (ti/hi 14x4 = 56). Each records, how many eaches on a pallet (ti/hi 14x4 and there are 3 jugs in a case = 168).

TIA!

[CommunityJedi22]

Sorry about that @lvanhouten we have quite a few conversations on this one 😁

For the attribute “Count of This Specific Item in a Non-GTIN Logistic Unit/NonGTIN Pallet Quantity,” it represents the total number of trade items on the pallet.  If you had 100 Cases on a pallet and each Case contained 5 Eaches, then the Count of This Specific Item in a Non-GTIN Logistic Unit/NonGTIN Pallet Quantity = 500.

[lvanhouten]

Perfect - thank you!

[lvanhouten]

I am still seeing these REVIEW messages - they were not cleared out with the recent release. 

[CommunityJedi22]

Hello @lvanhouten .  I am sorry to see your update.  I talked to our Product team and found I misunderstood the update this past weekend.  It did not resolve this issue overall.  I am discussing with the person in charge of IM and other tools to find out where an overall fix for this issue is in our roadmap.  I sincerely apologize for the misunderstanding on my end.