BR-DE-22
Not all filename attributes of the embeddedDocumentBinaryObject elements are unique
What does this rule mean?
Two attachments carry the same file name (BT-125, @filename).
Receivers store attachments by file name, so the second overwrites the first and a document goes missing with nobody noticing. Note that attachments with no file name at all also compare as equal.
Official rule message (standard)
Not all filename attributes of the embeddedDocumentBinaryObject elements are unique
Official rule message from the standard.
Where the rule applies
Syntax: CII · UBL
The same rule, expressed twice: UBL and CII name the same fields with different paths. Running a CII file against the UBL rules is why you get errors that mean nothing.
UBL
/ubl:Invoice | /cn:CreditNote
CII
/rsm:CrossIndustryInvoice
Technical test
The rule passes when this Schematron expression holds true:
count(//ram:AdditionalReferencedDocument) = count(//ram:AdditionalReferencedDocument[not(./ram:AttachmentBinaryObject/@filename = preceding-sibling::ram:AdditionalReferencedDocument/ram:AttachmentBinaryObject/@filename)])How to fix it
A missing or incorrect business entry only you can supply. Add or correct it, then re-check.
Give each attachment its own meaningful file name (e.g. timesheet-week14.pdf and delivery-note-4711.pdf), and make sure every attachment has a name in the first place.
Correct the affected entry in your XML, then re-check the invoice. Validation runs locally in your browser — your file never leaves your machine.
Check an e-invoice here
Drop an XML or ZUGFeRD PDF file here. Validation runs locally in your browser against EN 16931 — your file never leaves your machine.