You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
In both OCPI 2.2.1 and OCPI 3.0 review version, there are size limits on address fields:
Property
Type
address
UnicodeString[1..45]
city
UnicodeString[1..45]
state
UnicodeString[1..20]
Can we raise them to something that are impossible to hit such as 255? We have been bitten by these limits several times and were forced to be creative on distributing words between state, city, address in order to fit long addresses into these short fields. Sometimes it is just impossible to fit, and we have to truncate the address, possibly sacrificing readability.
Example 1: Australian Capital Territory (in Australia) can't fit in the state field.
Example 2: 150 Rajbophit Road, Ratchabophit Temple Sub-district, Phra Nakhon District, Bangkok (in Thailand) has a sub-district part which fits in neither the address field and the city field.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
In both OCPI 2.2.1 and OCPI 3.0 review version, there are size limits on address fields:
Can we raise them to something that are impossible to hit such as 255? We have been bitten by these limits several times and were forced to be creative on distributing words between state, city, address in order to fit long addresses into these short fields. Sometimes it is just impossible to fit, and we have to truncate the address, possibly sacrificing readability.
Example 1: Australian Capital Territory (in Australia) can't fit in the state field.
Example 2: 150 Rajbophit Road, Ratchabophit Temple Sub-district, Phra Nakhon District, Bangkok (in Thailand) has a sub-district part which fits in neither the address field and the city field.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: