Justin's branch was not correctly pulled from the outlet

I have the same situation. Here is the data on the socket https://prnt.sc/ufqmzm and like this in the box https://prnt.sc/ufqnt0 For some reason, the branch number is added immediately after the phrase st.

[quote] Tyndyk Maxim Vadimovich Administrator wrote: This request is not an error. The problem is that the action of importing orders from Rosette generates an address based on the transmitted data and adds it to the process in OneBox. Actually, "Kyiv, Bulgakova st., 73, 11a" comes, and this address does not correspond to any of the Justin branches (the address is written differently there - that's why you saw the first branch in the city that came across in the selector). But at the same time, additional issuance has a ref_id element, which contains the identifier of the branch of a particular delivery service. Accordingly, I can offer you a revision in 3 hours to teach the action depending on the delivery service and the presence of the above identifier - to determine the appropriate branch of the desired delivery service and use it address in the process for further correct use in integration with delivery services. [/quote] The solution is very tempting. A simple question arises, why initially, when they did the integration with the outlet, they didn’t do it the way you write, as for me it’s very logical, taking into account multilingualism?

[quote] Kupriyan Vlad Valerievich wrote: A simple question arises, why initially, when they did the integration with the outlet, they didn’t do it the way you write, as for me it’s very logical, taking into account multilingualism? [/quote] I assume you yourself know the answer to your question. The integrations were made at different times (I would even say years), and the terms of reference for such a bunch of integration functionality were not provided. I provided an assessment of the improvement of this issue above.

[quote] Tyndyk Maxim Vadimovich Administrator wrote: Kupriyan Vlad Valerievich wrote: A simple question arises, why initially, when they did the integration with the outlet, they didn’t do it as you write, as for me it’s very logical, taking into account multilingualism? I suppose you yourself know the answer to your question. The integrations were made at different times (I would even say years), and the terms of reference for such a bundle of integration functionalities were not provided. I provided an assessment of the improvement of this issue above. [/quote] And initially, when they did the integration, it transmitted the ID of the department, if so, why weren't they tied to it, but tied to the text that was passed?

[quote] Kupriyan Vlad Valerievich wrote: And initially, when they did the integration, it transmitted the ID of the department, if so, why weren't they tied to it, but tied to the text that was passed? [/quote] Integration with Rozetka was done earlier than with Justin, and accordingly, at the time of integration with Rozetka, there was no such thing. Well, when developing integration with Justin, they did not have a technical task for their integration on Rozetka and the need to use them with us.

It turns out that you either need to ask the socket to send it correctly or refine it (or even if the socket sends it correctly, it won’t help)?

[quote] Kupriyan Vlad Valerievich wrote: It turns out that you either need to ask the socket to send it correctly or refine it (or even if the socket sends it correctly, it won’t help)? [/quote] I indicated that the address that the client filled out comes in the text, and the ref_id is already sent by Rosette - this is specifically the identifier of the selected branch It is unlikely that you will make the Rozetka force customers to indicate their addresses according to the directories of delivery services - this is why the revision, in my opinion, is the easiest and fastest way out.

[quote] Tyndyk Maxim Vadimovich Administrator wrote: Kupriyan Vlad Valerievich wrote / a: It turns out that you either need to ask for an outlet to send it correctly or refine it (or even if the outlet sends it correctly, it won’t help)? I pointed out that the address that the client filled out comes in the text, and the ref_id is already sent by Rosette - this is specifically the identifier of the selected branch exit. [/quote] 1. Can you make an investment? 2. Will the revision include other delivery services (NP, UP) ?

[quote] 1. Can you make an investment? [/quote] https://crm-onebox.com/support/ofitsialnie-novosti-onebox/1487-besplatnie-dorabotki-dlya-oblachnih-polzovateley-onebox/ I will connect management to the task, perhaps it will be ready to invest in this [quote] 2. Will the revision include other delivery services (NP, UP) ? [/quote] According to the NP, such a refinement has already been made - it is determined there by the branch identifier. I offer you a similar revision for Justin. According to Ukrposhta, I have no information on how the branch identifier will be redone - in this appeal we are discussing Justin.

[quote] Tyndyk Maxim Vadimovich Administrator wrote: According to the NP, such a refinement has already been made - it is determined there by the branch identifier. I offer you a similar revision for Justin. According to Ukrposhta, I have no information on how the branch identifier will be redone - in this appeal we are discussing Justin. [/quote] It's just that according to UE there is a similar problem, the address (index) does not enter correctly, it is how the building on the street is put in place of the number Ok, we are waiting for the decision of the higher

[quote] Kupriyan Vlad Valerievich The client wrote: It’s just that according to the UE there is a similar problem, the address (index) does not enter correctly, it’s how the building on the street is put in place of the number Ok, we are waiting for the decision of the higher [/quote] Then you need to apparently receive the address of the branch through the API of Ukrposhta, and already take it into the order as the address of the order Then the assessment for Ukrposhta is the same as for NP

[quote] Kupriyan Vlad Valerievich wrote: Ok, we are waiting for the decision of the higher [/quote] clarified that investments will be made in accordance with the new rules https://crm-onebox.com/support/ofitsialnie-novosti-onebox/1487-besplatnie-dorabotki-dlya-oblachnih-polzovateley-onebox/ you do not have a cloud version accordingly, all I can do in this case is to provide an estimate of 3 hours of completion for each delivery service (we are discussing Justin and Ukrposhta - 6 hours)

I wrote to the outlet that's what they answered me https://prnt.sc/upy32y That is, asking "Please specify what kind of request you receive an order in your CRM?" Can you provide?

[quote] Kupriyan Vlad Valerievich wrote: I wrote to the outlet that's what they answered me https://prnt.sc/upy32y That is, asking "Please specify what kind of request you receive an order in your CRM?" Can you provide? [/quote] Using the method https://api.seller.rozetka.com.ua/orders/search If you want specific requests, submit a separate request for a specific request. I provided information and assessment on this appeal.

Judging from the response of the socket, it is clear that they transmit the address in separate fields, it turns out that the box is somehow glued incorrectly Well, it’s clear that it happened so historically that it doesn’t merge correctly, well, we’ll wait for those who want to make improvements who have a cloud

Answer TP Rozetka: Good afternoon. Please add parameter expand=delivery https://prnt.sc/vgnv0a https://api.seller.rozetka.com.ua/orders/search ?expand=delivery https://prnt.sc/vgnwco - "place_number" is correct. Please see the documentation. That is, if I understand correctly, then there is an error in the integration