<ram:ApplicableHeaderTradeDelivery /> is written, even if it contains no elements

[ThomasSpeedy]

<ram:ApplicableHeaderTradeDelivery /> is written, even if it contains no elements. This causes a warning in valitool validation (see https://www.portinvoice.com/):

[VD-Valitool-126]-Hinweis: Es wurde ein leeres Element übergeben z.B. . Dies kann bei einigen Zielsystemen zu Problemen führen. Sie sind leere Elemente z.B. bei der Übermittlung der Rechnung über das Peppol-Netzwerk nicht zulässig.
/rsm:CrossIndustryInvoice/rsm:SupplyChainTradeTransaction/ram:ApplicableHeaderTradeDelivery

Wouldn't it be correct to not add <ram:ApplicableHeaderTradeDelivery /> if it contains no elements?

[stephanstapel]

ApplicableHeaderTradeDelivery is mandatory:

that is the reason why it is always written, regardless of whether any of the subelements is filled or not.

[MaikeDoering]

Hi @stephanstapel,
I got problems with this. We get validation errors because of this empty element. It is not required, just in a 1 to 1 relationship. This only means it is only once allowed, right?

How could we fix this on our side?

[IsThatUniqueEnough]

The element is mandatory (due to an implicit minOccurs=1 in the schema and a cardinality of 1..1 in the docs). It's probably a bug to have a mandatory group with only optional child elements while disallowing empty elements (as XRechnung does with PEPPOL-EN16931-R008) but that's the way it currently is...

How could we fix this on our side?

Is it intentionally that you don't supply a DeliveryDate (BT-72)? If you have good reasons for that you could supply a ShipToTradeParty with the buyers address.