Naming inconsistencies postal/zip codes #343
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Hi!
While tinkering with the get receipt route I found some inconsistencies with the postal/zip code naming.
$this->postal was causing an undefined property error when calling '/receipt/{orderId}'. Changing postal to zipCode fixed it. Also checked if it was happening in other places and found the order blueprint also needed a change. I left the display name in the order blueprint unchanged because I think "Postal Code" is more recognizable for people who don't speak english. So if the dev left the Statamic cp unchanged the end-user is more likely to recognize it but that is just my opinion. Maybe I'm just thinking too much about edge-cases 😅