banking-addons-team team mailing list archive

["Stefan Rijnhart \(Therp\)" <stefan@xxxxxxxx>]

Hi Alexis,
> In fact, from my experience, if all banks respect the guidelines of the European Payments Council (http://www.europeanpaymentscouncil.eu/), we shouldn't have several dialects to implement, because these guidelines are pretty accurate. We'll see if we are confronted to such problems ; in this case, we will modularise the code in order to be able to inherit the generation of the XML file.

Well, all Dutch banks have published addendums with requirements that 
say 'Leave this element out' or 'Always fill this element with 
NOTIMPLEMENTED'... But I have not yet gotten the feedback from the 
bank's validation service so I will keep you updated on this.

>
> I'll try to find some time in the coming days to clean-up the function _validate_iban which should avoid the big block of code in the POT file. By the way, do you think that it's necessary the validate the IBAN in the generation of the XML file ? The IBAN is already validated when we enter it in OpenERP, so it may not be necessary to validate a second time ?

I think you are correct. In fact, what is missing is a generic function 
in the payment order to check whether there is a bank account of the 
allowed type for every payment order line. I will add one soon. So you 
could perhaps remove the validation method entirely.


-- 
https://code.launchpad.net/~akretion-team/banking-addons/trunk-banking-addons-sepa/+merge/167514
Your team Banking Addons Core Editors is subscribed to branch lp:banking-addons.