Section title: News
Announcement

X12’s JSON Survey Validates Consensus-driven Transaction Standards are Critical

Insights from X12’s JSON survey indicate that many organizations in the supply chain ecosystem are already employing X12’s standard metadata in JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) syntax, both internally and externally with trading partners. Overall, respondents report plans to expand their use of JSON, and they believe X12 standard JSON schemas are valuable. Respondents noted that most existing data exchange processes remain solidly supported by X12 transactions, while X12 JSON schemas could help organizations unlock new opportunities through application programming interfaces (APIs). 

Why the survey is significant to X12

The X12 Business to Everything (B2X) Subcommittee initiated the JSON survey in support of the X12 JSON Proof of Concept (PoC) Program. As part of X12’s ongoing efforts to increase flexibility that enables implementers to leverage existing investments in standards, the survey informed continued evaluation of JSON-based approaches. Moreover, the B2X and PoC groups’ work is expected to create an easier path for API integrations built on X12's standardized, mature metadata.

The survey assessed the use of the JSON syntax related to X12 transactions and identified potential new use cases. Findings will help inform X12’s decisions, confirming whether JSON-related standards development work is on track, along with adjacent PoC programs.

Key highlights 

39% of survey respondents use JSON-centric messages based on X12 transaction sets today, though several cited multiple challenges, such as:

  • Keeping requirements synchronized so end users can receive JSON-centric messages when each partner establishes its own version.
  • X12 transactions already solves two major issues presented when using JSON messages: (1) when no agreed-upon standard exists and each company decides to build its own approach, custom programming is necessary for each implementation — a model that doesn’t cost effectively scale; and (2) the sheer size of the payload, including transfer data, can increase by as much as tenfold compared to an X12 transaction.
  • JSON does not adhere to the EDI ASCII character set.
  • Iteration-batching, compared with individual outputs, contributes to load issues and bottlenecking.
  • X12 validation standards are lost with most EDI software when converted to JSON, likely leading to variability and friction.

When asked whether plans are underway to use JSON-centric messages based on X12 transaction sets in the future, 78% reply yes, elaborating they are:

  • Looking to enhance their supply chain into JSON for use in APIs
  • Transforming from X12 to JSON to enable better analytics, machine learning and AI, and data warehousing.
  • Incorporating X12 into a standard set of JSON schemas to accommodate any transaction.

69% currently use JSON internally within their organization and externally with trading partners, 19% externally only, and 13% internally only.

56% use JSON both transactionally (equivalent to current X12 transaction sets) and conversationally (API driven), 33% conversationally (APIs), and 11% transactionally.

Questioned if their organization were to add or expand JSON-centric solutions, 80% state they would be implemented both transactionally (equivalent to the current X12 transaction sets) and conversationally (API driven), 17% conversationally only, and 4% transactionally only.

Survey participants describe current or planned JSON use cases, such as:

  • Internal data processing and storing data
  • Supply chain and logistics transactions
  • Shipment status messages
  • JSON API functionality to meet customer demand as the rail industry’s use is growing
  • Internal processing and externally via their translator
  • Transportation integration

70% are willing to work with X12 to develop case studies highlighting its use of JSON with X12 transaction sets.

46% believe JSON-centric messages would help with functions such as “proprietary processes” and “event-driven triggers”, 54% report that JSON-centric messages wouldn’t help data exchange processes.

57% indicate that their organizations rely on a translator or a stand-alone business process to manage JSON messaging, whereas 43% state their organizations’ core business systems support JSON out of the box. 

74% reveal their organization already deploys or will require support for Representational State Transfer (REST) APIs and JSON for internal or external data exchange processes, while 26% do not anticipate requiring this support. 

Conclusion

The survey confirms that standard JSON schemas derived from X12 metadata would help organizations that are new to X12 standards as well as those already using X12 standards to achieve more and realize greater value from the investments they’ve already made. To support that momentum, implementers need pragmatic guidance that preserves the X12 standard’s strengths while embracing innovations. X12’s JSON PoC and B2X groups are well positioned to lead the way.