{"id":12419,"date":"2024-02-02T18:31:46","date_gmt":"2024-02-02T16:31:46","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.capcargo.com\/?page_id=12419"},"modified":"2024-02-02T18:31:46","modified_gmt":"2024-02-02T16:31:46","slug":"10-0-cap39-0-02-02-2024","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/www.capcargo.com\/en\/10-0-cap39-0-02-02-2024\/","title":{"rendered":"10.0-CAP39.0 (02.02.2024)"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n\n\n\n\t\n\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t
Topic<\/th>Title & Details<\/th>Release Month<\/th>Task type<\/th>ADO ID<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n
Geo-services<\/td>
Geocoding the address (for the 'Price inquiry') was sometimes happening only on the street name level<\/summary>

'Price inquiry' address geocoding was enhanced, to achieve the same geocoding result level (as if the address was geocoded via standard means in global address book, ie. outside 'Price inquiry').<\/p><\/details><\/div><\/code><\/td>

2024-02<\/td>New feature<\/td>102182<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Dispatching and confirmation<\/td>
Store coordinates on various tour confirmation tables<\/summary>

Primarily meant to be used with Driver app.
\nNow coordinates from the Driver app confirmation are stored on various tour confirmation tables, such as Tour stop, Orders on tour, Package confirmation, Empties. Button \"View on map\" has been added on Tour confirmation form to show the confirmed location on the map.<\/p><\/details><\/div><\/code><\/td>

2024-02<\/td>New feature<\/td>102028<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Optimizer (Preview\/CTP)<\/td>
Improve Optimizer warning at tour release in case of duplicate \"Drive\" activities<\/summary>

When duplicate \"Drive\" activities were identified during the process of releasing an Optimizer tourplan, system correctly threw a warning. However, pinpointing the exact line to which system made reference was quite difficult, especially with large tourplans. The warning has been enhanced to contain both Optimizer tour ID(s) and tour line number(s) which triggered the warning.<\/p><\/details><\/div><\/code><\/td>

2024-02<\/td>New feature<\/td>102636<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Optimizer (Preview\/CTP)<\/td>
Introduce new parameter: Suppress reload at depot<\/summary>

In particular data constellations (multiple loadings at one or more depots, short distances to unloadings, limited vehicle capacities etc.), Optimizer tourplans done via provider PTV xTour contained tours with one or more returns to one or more depots for reloads within same tour. Since some business cases do not allow for reloads, but just one 'run' per tour, a new parameter \"Suppress reload at depot\" was introduced.
\n
\nDefault value is false, which means default behavior is to allow for reloads (if at all possible), as until now. When parameter is true, reload is not allowed at the 'same' depot within same tour. Loading at multiple depots 'once' in a tour is still possible.
\n
\nFor flexibility and consistency, this parameter was also introduced in the Optimizer dispatching form as well as the tourplan parameters section.<\/p><\/details><\/div><\/code><\/td>

2024-02<\/td>New feature<\/td>102349<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Optimizer (Preview\/CTP)<\/td>
TMS tour(s) created from imported Generic provider tourplan(s) to match distance and time imported<\/summary>

When releasing an imported, Generic provider tourplan, it is important that the created TMS tours mirror exactly the distance and the times from import file, regardless of additional TMS capabilities to enhance such tour. Thus, in case of releasing a Generic provider tourplan, on the TMS tour:
\n-- field \"Distance and time values up to date\" becomes True (to avoid inadvertent changing of imported distance and time values by some automatic distance and time calculation processes)
\n-- distances between tourstops are identical to the imported tourplan
\n-- all time intervals are identical to the imported tourplan
\n-- all activities automatically generated during creation of the TMS tour (due to TMS settings) which are not known by Optimizer (other than Load\/Unload\/Wait\/Break\/Checking goods) are reset to 00:00.
\n
\nIf tourplan contains an 'Arrive' tourline which is greater than 00:00, then this time will be added to the \"Checking goods\" activity on TMS tour. In such cases, it is mandatory that \"Checking goods\" (load\/unload) are enabled in TMS.<\/p><\/details><\/div><\/code><\/td>

2024-02<\/td>New feature<\/td>102166<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Optimizer (Preview\/CTP)<\/td>
Integrate all Optimizer menuitems into main CAPCargo Transport module<\/summary>

All Optimizer menuitems which were previously available in the separate CAPCargo Optimizer 'module' have been integrated in the CAPCargo Transport module. These menuitems continue to be visible and functional insofar as at least the 'CAPCargo Optimizer - base features' configuration key is enabled.
\n
\nThere are now separate Optimizer groupings under Common, Inquiries, Periodic and Setup sections in CAPCargo Transport module, while the CAPCargo Optimizer module has been removed altogether from the D365 tree structure.<\/p><\/details><\/div><\/code><\/td>

2024-02<\/td>New feature<\/td>101878<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Optimizer (Preview\/CTP)<\/td>
Improve Error Text field when Optimizer tourplan status = Error<\/summary>

During dispatching to Optimizer, certain data\/user input constellations lead to tourplan status \"Error\". However, not all of them are PTV xserver related. In such cases, there is nothing displayed in the error text field, even though the tourplan log clearly indicates details of the error. To avoid confusion, a new message was introduced to be displayed in the Error Text field: \"Check the Optimizer log for more details\". In case of xserver-related errors, these are still displayed directly in the Error Text field.<\/p><\/details><\/div><\/code><\/td>

2024-02<\/td>New feature<\/td>101751<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Optimizer (Preview\/CTP)<\/td>
Improve functionality and quality of information provided in Distance Matrix details form<\/summary>

In the Distance Matrix details form, not all existing fields showed data consistently. This was checked and fixed.
\nAdditionally, one new field was introduced, 'Routing type'. This field returns the PTV response regarding the type of algorithm used to calculated distances in a certain Distance Matrix, depending on whether any of the addresses used for DiMa creation were 'outside' of the HPRN defined for a particular vehicle type. In such a case, PTV performs a very fast, conventional, computation of 'airline' distances, in order to provide an initial calculation and not stop the overall process.<\/p><\/details><\/div><\/code><\/td>

2024-02<\/td>New feature<\/td>99870<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Optimizer (Preview\/CTP)<\/td>
Allow in certain scenarios the updating of TMS tours from same vehicle by dispatching new legs via Optimizer<\/summary>

Optimizer does not allow the updating of TMS tours with new legs, when the selection of tours contains two or more tours from same vehicle.
\nHowever, it is now possible to select tours initially created with resource combination plans on the same vehicle, on the condition that the tours were created using different resource combination plan lines. For example, if the same resource combination plan contained one line for one vehicle for morning shift, and then another line for same vehicle for afternoon shift, both morning and afternoon TMS tours could be selected and successful attempt could be made to update both tours at the same time with additional legs via Optimizer dispatching.<\/p><\/details><\/div><\/code><\/td>

2024-02<\/td>New feature<\/td>96483<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Optimizer (Preview\/CTP)<\/td>
Introduce new tourplan status \"Releasing\"<\/summary>

A new intermediate Optimizer tourplan status is introduced, named \"Releasing\". This can be especially helpful to inform the user regarding long-running tourplan release processes. This status is displayed while a particular tourplan has already been Released (either by manually pressing the \"Release tourplan\" button or by having activated the \"Auto create TMS tours\" parameter on the tourplan), but TMS tour creation process is not yet finished.
\nWhile status \"Releasing\" is displayed, buttons \"Release tourplan\" and \"Delete tourplan\" are now disabled.<\/p><\/details><\/div><\/code><\/td>

2024-02<\/td>New feature<\/td>94884<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Optimizer (Preview\/CTP)<\/td>
Add GPB dialog to refresh Gantt screen after Optimizer tourplan is released<\/summary>

A new GPB dialog was introduced to automatically popup when Optimizer tourplan release process is done to inform the user of this and also to offer possibility to refresh the Gantt screen to see the newly created TMS tours. This dialog is triggered only when parameter \"Auto-create TMS tour\" is set to True during Optimizer dispatching.
\n
\nThis dialog has a \"Refresh\" checkbox, which is False by default. In such a case, if user clicks OK, no refresh happens (user is just informed). If user checks this box, a lookup on the dialog enables user to choose in which Gantt screen to see the new tours in focus (Resource or Tour Dispatching).
\n
\nThe dialog pops up even in the case when the Optimizer dispatching action cannot create any TMS tours.<\/p><\/details><\/div><\/code><\/td>

2024-02<\/td>New feature<\/td>93738<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Optimizer (Preview\/CTP)<\/td>
Clarification of warning in case of transport legs being sent to Optimizer with addresses from different timezones<\/summary>

In case transport legs containing addresses from more than one timezone were being dispatched via Optimizer, a warning was given to the user to this fact. The warning was a bit confusing. The text of the warning was thus updated and the timezone field was also added to the Parameters section of the tourplan.<\/p><\/details><\/div><\/code><\/td>

2024-02<\/td>New feature<\/td>92053<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Optimizer (Preview\/CTP)<\/td>
Eliminate redundant data from Optimizer request to provider PTV xtour.<\/summary>

In case of using PTV xtour as Optimizer provider, the request file contained some redundant data which did not harm the process in any way, but could make it difficult to analyze issues for users looking at this file. Such redundant data was eliminated.<\/p><\/details><\/div><\/code><\/td>

2024-02<\/td>New feature<\/td>91918<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Master data<\/td>
Several GPB related parameters were rearranged in the Workers form (GUI adjustment only)<\/summary>

Following GUI adjustments were done in the Workers form:
\n - 'Template OS configuration' was moved from 'Filter Initialization Dispatching' to 'GPB Parameters' section
\n - 'GPB filter template' was moved from 'Filter Initialization Dispatching' to 'GPB Parameters' section
\n - Field groups were added to 'GPB Parameters' section<\/p><\/details><\/div><\/code><\/td>

2024-02<\/td>New feature<\/td>103249<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Dispatching and confirmation<\/td>
Returning several filter dedicated elements from 'main ribbon' into 'above the grid' position, in GPB 'Transport orders \/-legs' screen<\/summary>

In GPB 'Transport orders \/-legs' screen, several filter related icons were previously moved from 'above the grid' position into 'main ribbon' position (where other action elements are accessible). This turned out to be rather confusing (and slowing down dispatchers daily work) and is thus partially reverted.
\n
\nThe \"Clear' & 'Clear all' & other dedicated filtering elements are now returned to their original position - to 'above the grid'.<\/p><\/details><\/div><\/code><\/td>

2024-02<\/td>New feature<\/td>102307<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Dispatching and confirmation<\/td>
Unification of tour description field length<\/summary>

Previously, it was possible - during tour creation - to specify long description of the tour. But only first 50 characters were actually saved into database, thus the exceeding descriptions were lost. To unite the behavior, dialogs\/screens for creation of new tour were adjusted, to also allow only 50 character for tour description.<\/p><\/details><\/div><\/code><\/td>

2024-02<\/td>New feature<\/td>102212<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Dispatching and confirmation<\/td>In GPB 'Resources' screen, the individual columns (ie. resource groups) were previously sometimes not graphically aligned across 'Planned' and 'Available' horizontal sections<\/td>2024-02<\/td>New feature<\/td>102001<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Dispatching and confirmation<\/td>
GPB data access rights - filter by depots and\/or dispatch sectors<\/summary>

Personalize and simplify the view and data access in GPB screens, for the user [group] to focus and limit to his relevant data only.
\n
\nA dynamic filter template approach allows the dispatchers to see only data for specific depots or dispatch sectors.
\nIndividual filter content configuration can be setup, allowing to define which values from a master table (e.g. which depots) can be accessed and which not. This template can be assigned to the user; even more, with individual security roles setting, it could be defined, that the user himself cannot change his settings.
\n
\nThe user will only be able to select amongst those valid filter lookup elements, not from all elements. Additionally it can be configured, if the user also shall see \"empty depot\/dispatch sector\" records: If activated, the user can also see records without depot \/ dispatch sector involvement. I.e. the user can also see direct transports or transports to other depots \/ dispatch sectors.
\n
\nNote: Above latter point is still weak and will be improved in a next release, in a way user still can see direct transports but not other transports to not-allowed depots \/ dispatch sectors, if \"show empty\" is activated. - If parameter is deactivated, the user can only see records, where the allowed depot \/ dispatch sector is part of, i.e. no direct transports.
\n
\nFurther more, it is planned to enhance the feature with more criteria, next to the depot and dispatch sector: Vehicle group and driver group.
\n
\nDisclaimer:
\nThis feature only applies to GPB not to dispatch light or any none-GPB process.
\nIt is not to be compared with D365 standard 'Extensible Data Security (XDS) framework'.
\nHence this feature is no technical data base access control tool, i.e. when jumping from GPB to a D365 form and navigate further there, this will not be blocked.<\/td>

2024-02<\/td>New feature<\/td>101979<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Dispatching and confirmation<\/td>Tour viewpoint could get previously sometimes lost in GPB 'Tour Dispatching' screen, when view was switched to '1 week'<\/td>2024-02<\/td>New feature<\/td>94303<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Driver App<\/td>
Change of mobile app integration schema (important only for projects that do *NOT* use the CAPcargo middleware for mobile apps)<\/summary>

Important:
\nIn case of mobile app custom implementation (either Driver app or Truck loading app), the change of integration schema has to be reflected in the custom implementation, to ensure that mobile app continue working even after the upgrade to 10.0-CAP39.0.
\n
\nRelevant for customers who don\u00b4t use CAPcargo middleware and apps but use the Mobile app D365 integrations with their own app(s).
\n
\nRemoved field in Mobile app tour line (TALdraTourLineEntity):
\n - EMAIL - this field has been documented as obsolete for quite some time already, but it\u00b4s removed in CAP39. It should actually be removed from the data project mapping before installing CAP39
\n
\nNew fields in Mobile app tour activity (TALdraTourActivityEntity) (all related to 100087 Driver app - Show summary on signature)
\n - CHECKLISTLEVEL (integer)
\n - CUSTREF (string)
\n - CUSTREF2 (string)
\n - SIGNATUREID<\/p><\/details><\/div><\/code><\/td>

2024-02<\/td>New feature<\/td>102837<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Driver App<\/td>
Fix issues in the \"Checklist\" preview feature in Driver app<\/summary>

In CAP38 a new preview feature \"Checklist\" was introduced in Driver app. Several issues in this feature have been fixed.
\n
\nKnown issues:
\nMany problems with barcode scanning. It\u00b4s not recommended to use this feature with packages \/ barcodes at this point.<\/p><\/details><\/div><\/code><\/td>

2024-02<\/td>New feature<\/td>101949<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Driver App<\/td>
Driver app - Show summary on signature<\/summary>

Show summary of loaded or unloaded goods and other activities on the Signature screen in Driver app. Several (but not all) activity types in D365 can be enabled to be shown on the summary. Additionally an Instruction activity rule for \"Summary page at signature\" must be set up.<\/p><\/details><\/div><\/code><\/td>

2024-02<\/td>New feature<\/td>100087<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Driver App<\/td>
'System generated' empties transactions are now also shown in the driver app<\/summary>

Previously, only manually created empties transactions were shown in the driver app.<\/p><\/details><\/div><\/code><\/td>

2024-02<\/td>New feature<\/td>99381<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Optimizer (Preview\/CTP)<\/td>
Fix issue in interpreting resource assignments and their impact on resource availability<\/summary>

There was an issue in interpreting resource availability for Optimizer. If previous assignment ended 06:59:59, the system interpreted this as \"resource is available starting 06:59:59\", but in case the resource is available only 07:00:00. The issue caused overlapping resource assignments, as well as strange start times for tours.<\/p><\/details><\/div><\/code><\/td>

2024-02<\/td>New feature<\/td>102207<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Dispatching and confirmation<\/td>Tour report now also shows the transport quantity (in the transport order\/lines detail sections). Previously, only transport unit was shown in the tour report<\/td>2024-02<\/td>New feature<\/td>101953<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Subcontracting\/IC order management and pricing<\/td>
Subcontracting order terminology unification<\/summary>

Several labels were corrected in the subcontracting order area, to use consistent terminology. Eg. FTL\/LTL based labels were renamed to better fit new harmonized terminology of \"Resource subcontracting\" & \"Transport leg subcontracting\" (usually abbreviated to \"Tr-leg subcontracting\").<\/p><\/details><\/div><\/code><\/td>

2024-02<\/td>New feature<\/td>101348<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Subcontracting\/IC order management and pricing<\/td>
Details of all price calculations are newly included in the Subcontracting order report<\/summary>

Previously, when subcontracting order price was calculated via several price calculations (eg. different Contract\/Version\/Relation on sub-contracting order lines etc.) then only details of first price calculation were included in the Subcontracting order report. Now, the details of ALL involved price calculations are included in the report.<\/p><\/details><\/div><\/code><\/td>

2024-02<\/td>New feature<\/td>100947<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Customer order management and pricing<\/td>
New feature: up to 3 empties units (and quantities) can be specified per transport units; adding empties data to transport order line<\/summary>

In this task the handling of the empties is being improved. Newly, on transport type master data, up to three empties units (and its quantities) can be specified that are linked to a transport unit.
\n
\nThese empties units (and qty) are then also initialized to transport order line, where it can be also individually adjusted. The empties data (from transport order line) are then also used as a base for empties transactions (in tour confirmation),
\nThis gives on opportunity to see (and actively maintain) empties data already from the order creation.<\/p><\/details><\/div><\/code><\/td>

2024-02<\/td>New feature<\/td>100157<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Master data<\/td>
Additional validations needed for truck and trailer fields in resource combination plan<\/summary>

In the resource combination plan, truck and trailer were properly validated during entry into field via selection from lookup. However, it was possible to enter the wrong resource (truck instead of trailer or trailer instead of truck) by correctly typing the right ID into the wrong field. This was now fixed.<\/p><\/details><\/div><\/code><\/td>

2024-02<\/td>New feature<\/td>99970<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Other \/ General<\/td>
Removal of obsolete objects, which were deprecated in CAP27-CAP34 releases<\/summary>

Obsolete objects which were deprecated in CAP27-CAP34 releases were removed. This is a regular periodic 'cleaning' task, to remove previously announced deprecated features.
\n
\nFor further information please refer to CAPcargo lifecycle support documentation.<\/p><\/details><\/div><\/code><\/td>

2024-02<\/td>New feature<\/td>99730<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Dispatching and confirmation<\/td>
Missing infolog in 'Confirm tour completely' process, in certain specific 'depot' related cases<\/summary>

In certain business cases, the tour must be also 'Released to depot' in order to start with tour confirmation. Most of tour confirmation buttons & processes were correctly performing such validation (and users were informed via infolog 'Only limited tour stop confirmation is allowed (e.g. truck preparation), since the loading needs to be released for the depot first.'). The complication was with 'Confirm tour completely' button in tour confirmation, as there the validation was also triggered, but user was not informed via infolog (and thus did not know why the tour cannot be confirmed).
\nThe button was improved and triggers now the same infolog (as other tour confirmation buttons\/processes).<\/p><\/details><\/div><\/code><\/td>

2024-02<\/td>New feature<\/td>99726<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Master data<\/td>Distorted visualization of the address lookup (ie. address records were vertically too wide) in the 'Cross docking rule' from, when departure\/destination zone code was set to \"Address'<\/td>2024-02<\/td>New feature<\/td>99097<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Optimizer (Preview\/CTP)<\/td>
Optimizer planning newly reflects also cross-docking deadlines<\/summary>

This solution shall ensure, that optimizer respects cross-docking deadlines mostly in multi-modal traffic, i.e. between railway and road.
\n - Making sure, the goods are early enough at the railway station for train departure.
\n - Making sure, the goods can be picked up as early as possible at the railway station.
\n
\nIn order to define the requested time slots, we introduce a time window to be entered in the route\/zone master table which is used for the predecessor or the successor transport leg (not for the actual leg of this route).<\/p><\/details><\/div><\/code><\/td>

2024-02<\/td>New feature<\/td>95919<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Subcontracting\/IC order management and pricing<\/td>
Duplicate showing of subcontracting pricing parameters on the contract relation form<\/summary>

Previously, several subcontracting pricing parameters (ie. 'Sub-contractor inherits tariff qty', 'Search only in depending contracts', 'Not statistics relevant') were shown twice on the contract relation form. This was corrected and only one set of subcontracting parameters is not visible.<\/p><\/details><\/div><\/code><\/td>

2024-02<\/td>New feature<\/td>95804<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Dispatching and confirmation<\/td>
Conflict management - Block \"Release to depot\" and \"Release for departure\" by conflict type and transport type<\/summary>

This feature enhances the options for setting up blocking conflicts. Now it\u00b4s possible to define per conflict type-transport type combination if a conflict should block \"Release to depot and\/or \"Release for departure\".<\/p><\/details><\/div><\/code><\/td>

2024-02<\/td>New feature<\/td>95485<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Master data<\/td>
Enhance Tour start\/end initialization through resources and further tour default values from Transport Type<\/summary>

This feature brings greater flexibility in parameterization of tour start and end initialization.
\n
\nImportant! Data migration job (ADO ID 92911) has to be run followed by thoughtful review of parameterization of new fields across Transport Types before resuming productive activities.
\n
\nFollowing changes are introduced:
\n
\nSection 'Default values tour' from Transport Parameters>Dispatching>Tour summary tab has been moved entirely to the Transport Type>Dispatching summary tab.
\nEnum value 'To predecessor tour' from old Transport Type parameter for tour initalization mode was deprecated.
\n
\nThe tour initialization section on Transport type has been replaced with two separate sections, 'Tour start' and 'Tour end'.
\nThe old tour initialization mode field has been replaced by two separate fields 'Tour start' in TourStart section, and 'Tour End' in TourEnd section.
\n
\nNew enum values in TourStart field:
\n - None
\n - Vehicle depot
\n - Driver home
\n - Predecessor tour (replaces 'from predecessor tour')
\n - First load address in tour
\n
\nNew enum values in TourEnd field:
\n - None
\n - Vehicle depot
\n - Driver home
\n - Last unload address in tour
\n
\nOld Truck\/trailer field in Tour initialization mode was replaced with two separate independent modes: one for TourStart, another one for TourEnd. Consequently, the tour start and end can be independently initialized either from motor vehicle or trailer parameterization, in conjunction with values selected in TourStart\/End fields.
\n
\nExisting fields \"Predecessor tour (days)\" and \"Data to be promoted\" are now in relation to Tour start value 'Predecessor tour'.
\n
\nThese Tour Start\/End init values have been implemented at several levels, and thus initialization logic is from deepest to most generic level: Midterm driver plan\/Vehicle masterdata\/Transport type.
\nFor example, if a tour is created for a vehicle+driver combination, system will first check whether such combination exists and valid at the tourstart datetime on midterm driver plan. If so, then if any Tour start\/end parameterization exists on the specific line other than None, it will be used to initialize Tour start\/end. If nothing found or not valid, next parameterization check will be done at the vehicle masterdata level. If nothing found or not valid there either, same check will be done at Transport Type level.
\nIf value 'None' is selected at TT level, attempt will be made to initialize tourstart\/end from default values Tour start\/end addresses (newly moved on TT from Transport parameters). If these address fields are empty, no further initialization will be attempted, and existing tourstart\/end will not be changed.
\n
\nThe 'Create new tour' dialog has been enhanced with two new initialization buttons:
\n - Init from driver (home)
\n - Init from predecessor tour
\nAlso, Tourstart datetime init value is now taken from each individual TT set of parameters (\"Tour start date (+days)\" and \"Start time\"), not the generic Transport Parameter anymore.
\n
\nGPB:
\nTwo new buttons were added in GS>Dispatching>Dispatch lookup:
\n - Init tour start address
\n - Init tour end address
\nPressing these buttons will trigger the re-initialization of selected tour according to resource parameterization found on the tour at respective moment.
\n
\nAt new tour creation (whether by manual dispatching of Transport order into new tour OR at Create new tour in DispLight Tour\/GPB), manual change of Tour Start\/End addresses overrides the built-in initialization process from aforementioned parameters for the initial tour creation. However, these addresses might still be changed (depending on parameterization) in further actions on tour (example: moving tour to another resource with different parameterization, pressing the new GPB tour init buttons etc.)<\/p><\/details><\/div><\/code><\/td>

2024-02<\/td>New feature<\/td>92553<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Subcontracting\/IC invoicing<\/td>
Direct subcontracting (without tour)<\/summary>

It is now possible to subcontract a transport leg without dispatching it in a tour.
\nThis new feature can be found both in Dispatch Light, as well as in GPB, under new grouping \"Direct subcontracting\".
\n
\nFor any selected transport leg, a new subcontracting order of type Tr-leg can be created. These subcontracting orders have the same structure as subcontracting orders (Tr-Leg) generated from tour side (manual creation or allocation of resources of Tr-Leg subcontracting mode to tour), except for any tour-related data.
\n
\nAny transport leg already subcontracted without a tour (direct subcontracting) is not visible anymore amongst the plannable orders\/legs, but can be identified in the subcontracting order list page, filtered by orders without tour.
\n
\nIn the subcontracting order ribbon, a new menuitem has been added: 'Confirmation direct subcontracting', leading to a new form, where separate tour order lines can be confirmed. This menuitem is enabled only when selected subcontracting order is without tour.
\n
\nTransport order status has also been adjusted to reflect this new feature (no new status inserted):
\nThus, if at least one of all transport legs of a transport order is directly subcontracted [or normally dispatched into a tour], the order status becomes 'Partially planned'. If all transport legs of a transport order are either dispatched in tour OR directly subcontracted, the order status becomes 'Dispatched'. If transport order is predispatched and transport leg is directly subcontracted and then subcontracting order is completely confirmed (via new form), transport order status becomes 'Delivered'.
\n
\nThe financial dimensions on the direct subcontracting orders are initialized from newly created financial dimensions section 'Tr-Leg Direct Subcontracting (without tour)'.
\n
\nAccruals posting for direct subcontracting order is normally based on existing parameter 'Accruals posting (tr-leg subcontracting).'
\n
\nThis feature is available only when configuration key 'Subcontracting structure: New\/harmonized entities (Resource,Transport leg...)' is enabled.<\/p><\/details><\/div><\/code><\/td>

2024-02<\/td>New feature<\/td>80325<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Driver App<\/td>
KNOWN ISSUE: Driver app - Gap is sometimes displayed between tour stops in Tour details screen<\/summary>

Sometimes a gap might appear between tour stops in the tour details screen. No stops are hidden, but there is a space between some stops. The gap disappears when scrolling the tour stop list. There\u00b4s no functional impact.<\/p><\/details><\/div><\/code><\/td>

2024-02<\/td>Known issue<\/td>103413<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Driver App<\/td>
KNOWN ISSUE: Driver app - When driver reports waiting in the app (creates new \"Wait\" activity) the activity sometimes disappears<\/summary>

Driver can report waiting on a tour stop by creating a new Wait activity. Sometimes this newly created activity disappears from the screen and therefore it\u00b4s not possible to complete it.
\n
\nWorkarounds include:
\n - Wait a few minutes, then refresh manually
\n - Create a new Wait activity. But in this case the original activity can reappear, even after departing the tour stop. If it does reappear, it must be swiped.<\/p><\/details><\/div><\/code><\/td>

2024-02<\/td>Known issue<\/td>103405<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Driver App<\/td>
KNOWN ISSUE: Driver app - \"Payment on delivery\" cosmetic issue when swiping the activity<\/summary>

If the driver has provided payment amount in the \"Payment on delivery\" activity, and then swipes the activity, the area underneath the activity appears red, indicating that swiping is not allowed. But it can still be swiped and the activity can be confirmed.<\/p><\/details><\/div><\/code><\/td>

2024-02<\/td>Known issue<\/td>103403<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Driver App<\/td>
KNOWN ISSUE: Driver app - Scanning of address area barcodes is not working<\/summary>

It is possible to set up barcodes on address areas (such as shelves, buildings), and enable Instruction activity rule \"Barcode scan (address area)\". With such setup the driver must scan barcode of the corresponding address area before loading or unloading goods on that address area.
\n
\nThis functionality has issues and should not be used in CAP39.
\nA workaround is to not use the \"Barcode scan (address area)\" instruction activity rule, which will let the driver swipe the address area activity in Driver app.<\/p><\/details><\/div><\/code><\/td>

2024-02<\/td>Known issue<\/td>103395<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Dispatching and confirmation<\/td>
Tour initialization mode from tour start to predecessor tour end is deprecated (Parameter transport type)<\/summary>

The tour start\/end address initialization is largely enhanced in feature 92553, and with this, the existing one option to initialize the tour start address\/time from a tour TO its predecessor tour end address\/time is removed (parameter on transport type). The much more common feature, to initialize the tour start address\/time FROM the predecessor tour is kept and enhanced.
\n
\nThere is no replacement of this old feature and no migration to a new feature. If customers used this or even enhanced it by CUS modification, please contact CAPcargo.<\/p><\/details><\/div><\/code><\/td>

2024-02<\/td>Deprecation<\/td>92910<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Other \/ General<\/td>
Data migration task - to copy the old 'tour related' default values (from transport parameters) to new fields in transport types<\/summary>

Data migration task for 92553.
\n
\nThe data migration task:
\n - copies all the values from old Default values tour in Transport parameters>Dispatching to corresponding new fields on each Transport type.
\n - changes the old tour initialization mode value \"From predecessor tour\" on Transport type (if found) to new value \"Predecessor tour\" on Tour Start lookup.
\n - copies Transport Type tour initialization parameter value in 'Truck\/Trailer' to both new parameters 'Truck\/Trailer' in Tour Start and Tour End groupings on Transport Type.<\/p><\/details><\/div><\/code><\/td>

2024-02<\/td>Data conversion<\/td>92911<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Other \/ General<\/td>
Data migration task - to transform the previously existing empties master data into the new structure<\/summary>

Data migration task for 100157.
\n
\nAs previously only one empties unit (and one quantity) could be parameterized on transport unit (in a transport type), while newly each transport unit can hold up to 3 empties units (and quantities), the data migration job was created. Data migration task populates 1st empties unit (and 1st empties quantity) on transport types\/transport units, where some empties parameterization was previously activated.
\n
\nPlease note: only empties parameterization of transport unit is processed\/migrated; the empties parameterization of individual planning units is ignored\/not migrated. The empties parameterization of individual planning units is nevertheless still used as additional base for empties transactions (in tour confirmation), until the empties on planning units is deprecated (in some future release).<\/p><\/details><\/div><\/code><\/td>

2024-02<\/td>Data conversion<\/td>100254<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Other \/ General<\/td>
Data migration task - to preserve current system functionality also under new setup<\/summary>

Data migration task for 95485.
\n
\nData migration job sets the \"Block \u00b4Release for departure\u00b4\" checkbox to 'Yes' for all entries in \"Settings for conflict management\" that match following criteria:
\n - Conflict level is Blocking
\n - OR Conflict points to Transport type where \"Block Tour release at conflict level\" is not None - in this case the checkbox is updated on all conflicts that have same or higher conflict level<\/p><\/details><\/div><\/code><\/td>

2024-02<\/td>Data conversion<\/td>95487<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Optimizer (Preview\/CTP)<\/td>
Tourplan calculation fails with error \"Failed to receive server response! The request channel timed out\"<\/summary>

Long-running Optimizer tourplan calculations may yield this error in case of a mismatch between the xServer client timeout parameter in Transport Parameters>Geo services>xServer parameter AND the overall timeout setup on actual xServer and its proxy. The helptext of the xServer client timeout parameter has been improved.<\/p><\/details><\/div><\/code><\/td>

2024-02<\/td>Bug<\/td>102438<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Optimizer (Preview\/CTP)<\/td>
Distance and time values from Optimizer tourplan are not always written (or written correctly) to the actual TMS tour after tourplan release<\/summary>

When releasing Optimizer tourplans created by using Optimizer provider PTV xTour, in some cases the values returned by Optimizer for total distance and time were not written at all or with incorrect values to the corresponding TMS tour(s) header.
\n
\nThis is now corrected, so that when either TMS tours are initially created from Optimizer tourplan release or TMS tours are updated via Optimizer tourplan release, the total distance and total time values from the tourplan line(s) are written one-to-one to the same fields on actual tour header. These can be later adjusted by manual trigger of distance time calculation.<\/p><\/details><\/div><\/code><\/td>

2024-02<\/td>Bug<\/td>102356<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Optimizer (Preview\/CTP)<\/td>
Optimizer-related functionality in GPB only available if Optimizer PTV xServer config key is on<\/summary>

Optimizer-related menuitems were missing from GPB Tr-Leg screen unless Optimizer PTV xServer configuration key was enabled. This was problematic, since using Generic Optimizer provider does not need any xServer related functionality, and it was thus fixed.<\/p><\/details><\/div><\/code><\/td>

2024-02<\/td>Bug<\/td>102218<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Optimizer (Preview\/CTP)<\/td>
Error displayed while attempting to add all legs to OPT while no legs are displayed in OS<\/summary>

In the particular case when GPS OS was filtered so that no Transport legs were visible, and user attempted to Dispatch all legs to Optimizer, the process correctly stopped, but error \"Object reference not set to an instance of an object\" was also displayed, confusing the user. This was fixed, so that the process would not even attempt to start, but rather warn the user that \"No transport legs present to create optimizer data!\".<\/p><\/details><\/div><\/code><\/td>

2024-02<\/td>Bug<\/td>101706<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Optimizer (Preview\/CTP)<\/td>
Manual change of calculation mode in Optimizer dispatch form resets the planning date set manually<\/summary>

When user would change the planning mode from \"Rough planning\" to \"Ignore rough planning\" and consequently change the planning date from the initial date coming from selected legs to another date, this manually selected date would revert to the original date if on the same form, user would then change the calculation mode from whichever default value was initialized to another value. This was now fixed, so that the date defined manually would not be reset without specific manual intervention on that field.<\/p><\/details><\/div><\/code><\/td>

2024-02<\/td>Bug<\/td>96119<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Optimizer (Preview\/CTP)<\/td>
Columns \"DistanceCumulated\" and \"DurationCumulated\" in table TaloptTourLine have wrong results<\/summary>

Visible only in the table browser, the columns \"DistanceCumulated\" and \"DurationCumulated\" in table TALoptTourLine have wrong results (not cumulating data at all, or cumulating it twice, etc.). This had no impact on the related KPI displayed on tourplan. However, this was now fixed.<\/p><\/details><\/div><\/code><\/td>

2024-02<\/td>Bug<\/td>95813<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Dispatching and confirmation<\/td>
Enhance exception handling in GPB processes<\/summary>

Handling of certain exceptions was only generic: message 'The remote server returned an error: (500) Internal Server Error.' was shown to user, which made it difficult to pinpoint the source of the issue. The generic error has now been enhanced to show more technical details (D365 stack trace) regarding the actual process which triggered the process stop.
\n
\nIf users get unexpected error messages when using GPB, they should send those error messages to CAPcargo for further analysis.<\/p><\/details><\/div><\/code><\/td>

2024-02<\/td>Bug<\/td>102617<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Other \/ General<\/td>
Microsoft .NET breaking change blocks various GPB processes<\/summary>

A workaround was implement to overcome a breaking change in .NET 4.8 (which Microsoft installed in D365 systems without advance notice). This change caused runtime errors (such as \"500 internal server error\") in some processes.
\n
\nThe processes that we have identified have been fixed.
\n
\nFor any remaining processes we have generally improved error messages in many GPB processes (separate task 102617), showing a more detailed error message with a stack trace, that can help find out where any remaining issues would be. If users get unexpected error messages when using GPB, they should send those error messages to CAPcargo for further analysis.<\/p><\/details><\/div><\/code><\/td>

2024-02<\/td>Bug<\/td>102460<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Dispatching and confirmation<\/td>Black overlay window (with transport order\/legs details) was sometimes not appearing for certain transport orders\/legs, in GPB 'Map' screen<\/td>2024-02<\/td>Bug<\/td>102406<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Dispatching and confirmation<\/td>Warning message was previously shown on each starting of GPB 'Transport orders \/-legs' screen if user was not related to any worker<\/td>2024-02<\/td>Bug<\/td>102127<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Dispatching and confirmation<\/td>
After 'Generate tour from transport leg' (in GPB 'Transport orders \/-legs' screen), the resulting tour(s) were sometimes appearing in the main gantt grid only after manual refresh<\/summary>

The issue was especially encountered when planning transport orders\/legs (with some customer wished dates) via multiselect in GPB 'Transport orders \/-legs' screen.<\/p><\/details><\/div><\/code><\/td>

2024-02<\/td>Bug<\/td>102083<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Dispatching and confirmation<\/td>When inserting a cross-docking to a tour in GPB 'Tour Dispatching' form, the tour was previously not automatically refreshed in the main gantt grid (and had to be refreshed manually, to see the result of the cross-docking)<\/td>2024-02<\/td>Bug<\/td>101970<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Dispatching and confirmation<\/td>\"Do not show this dialog again\" checkbox option (to skip further similar\/same dialogs) was previously not working (ie. was ignored) when drag & dropping transport legs to GPB 'Resources Dispatching' screen<\/td>2024-02<\/td>Bug<\/td>101727<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Dispatching and confirmation<\/td>Tour could previously sometimes disappear from the GPB gant view point, when 'show early\/late' filter was activated<\/td>2024-02<\/td>Bug<\/td>92252<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Driver App<\/td>
Instruction activities were removed from a tour stop after failed pickup was registered<\/summary>

This issue was related related to having instruction activity rule(s) with level \"Per tour stop or address area\" and having order lines without address area in the tour. If in such situation a driver would report a failed pickup, those instruction activities on the failed pickup tour stop might get removed \/ cancelled during instruction activity recalculation.<\/p><\/details><\/div><\/code><\/td>

2024-02<\/td>Bug<\/td>102118<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Driver App<\/td>
Empties registered in the Driver app (by the driver) were not visible in Driver app<\/summary>

Empties registered in the Driver app can now be inquired via the inquiry (top right) menu of the tour details and tour stop details screens.<\/p><\/details><\/div><\/code><\/td>

2024-02<\/td>Bug<\/td>101389<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Driver App<\/td>
When taking multiple pictures with \"Picture\" activity, different document types are used in D365<\/summary>

When taking multiple pictures with \"Picture\" activity, different document types were used in D365 for storing the attachments. The first one was correctly stored using Document type from \"Picture\" activity, others were using default document type.<\/p><\/details><\/div><\/code><\/td>

2024-02<\/td>Bug<\/td>100897<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Shipment Builder<\/td>
Unhandled 'stack trace' error when re-opening previously closed container during warehouse processing<\/summary>

The issue was especially happening when packing material had to be added to already closed container. Then re-opening of container was not possible and 'stack trace' error was shown. The issue was corrected and container re-opening is further possible.<\/p><\/details><\/div><\/code><\/td>

2024-02<\/td>Bug<\/td>102173<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Shipment Builder<\/td>
Correction of several issues in shipment builder redesign<\/summary>

Following issues were correctly in the area of shipment builder redesign:
\n - transport order synchronization button doesn't work in GPB gantt screens
\n - synchronization log after picking is missing
\n
\nPlease note: the issues were only happening when license configuration key 'Shipment builder' was activated in **Not officially released sub-modules**<\/p><\/details><\/div><\/code><\/td>

2024-02<\/td>Bug<\/td>101959<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Shipment Builder<\/td>
In certain warehouse scenarios, load splitting was previously not working correctly<\/summary>

The issue was happening especially during direct delivery chain.<\/p><\/details><\/div><\/code><\/td>

2024-02<\/td>Bug<\/td>101859<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Subcontracting\/IC order management and pricing<\/td>
New SubCo world: Price calculation of subcontracting Tr-leg only works with certain values of parameter 'Service provision date<\/summary>

When the new harmonized sub subcontracting structure is activated, the calculation and invoicing of 'Subcontracting Tr-leg' did not work if general transport parameter 'Service provision date Tr-leg subcontracting' was set to one of these values:
\n - [leg] load date
\n - [leg] unload date
\n
\nThis was fixed. (Any other value of the parameter were working normally).
\n
\nNote: With new feature 'Direct subcontracting (without tour) - #80325) the following values of the above mentioned parameters cannot work by design, because there is no tour:
\n - tour start date -> if set so, the system automatically applies the value '[leg] load date'
\n - tour expected end date -> if set so, the system automatically applies the value '[leg] unload date'<\/p><\/details><\/div><\/code><\/td>

2024-02<\/td>Bug<\/td>103410<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Subcontracting\/IC invoicing<\/td>
Parameter 'Accruals posting (TrLeg subcontracting)' not functional for values \"none\" or \"at customer invoicing\"<\/summary>

In harmonized subcontracting world, the accruals posting for Tr-Leg subcontracting orders always worked as if parameter 'Accruals posting (TrLeg subcontracting' was set to \"At confirmation\", even when the selected value was \"none\" or \"at customer invoicing\". This was fixed.<\/p><\/details><\/div><\/code><\/td>

2024-02<\/td>Bug<\/td>103141<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Customer order management and pricing<\/td>Some planning quantity positions were previously not always recalculated after transport quantity was changed, in the transport order creation dialog<\/td>2024-02<\/td>Bug<\/td>102941<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Driver App<\/td>
Tour confirmation can't be opened, and tour is not sent to the Driver App, if you have two \"Scan barcode (address area)\" rules with different Position<\/summary>

An issue in Instruction activity framework was fixed, which would in a specific constellation prevent sending tour to Driver app or opening Tour confirmation form (exception happening in instruction activity calculation because of unexpected settings).<\/p><\/details><\/div><\/code><\/td>

2024-02<\/td>Bug<\/td>102821<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Customer order management and pricing<\/td>
Unexpected error displayed during creation of collective order on Transport Order<\/summary>

When creating a new collective order from Transport Order, error \"Field 'Total time'(= -82142) can only contain positive numbers.\" was sometimes displayed. This was now fixec.<\/p><\/details><\/div><\/code><\/td>

2024-02<\/td>Bug<\/td>102379<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Driver App<\/td>
Several activity types had previously wrong 'Default category', in instruction activity rule form<\/summary>

Following activity types were corrected:
\n - Input - Checkbox
\n - Input - Number with decimals
\n - Input - Number without decimals
\n
\nThese had previously default category 'Instruction', newly these have default category 'Dispatching'.<\/p><\/details><\/div><\/code><\/td>

2024-02<\/td>Bug<\/td>102353<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Dispatching and confirmation<\/td>Summary section calculation (on the loading list) was previously sometimes showing incorrect amounts (which were not corresponding to the individual planning\/inventory quantities of the order lines)<\/td>2024-02<\/td>Bug<\/td>101951<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Driver App<\/td>
Transport order could not be created under certain instruction activity rule setup<\/summary>

Instruction activity rule 'Barcode scan (address area)' can be created without 'Position' (for target 'Transport order'). This issue was that such rule previously blocked the transport order creation. The issue was corrected and the position is not anymore required for transport order creation.<\/p><\/details><\/div><\/code><\/td>

2024-02<\/td>Bug<\/td>101891<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Subcontracting\/IC invoicing<\/td>
Infolog text triggered from new subcontracting world still displayed text from legacy subcontracting<\/summary>

In certain process constellation in the subcontracting order, a triggered infolog displayed text from the new subcontracting world only for the first tariff unit, while for subsequent tariff units it still triggered text from legacy subcontracting. This was now fixed.<\/p><\/details><\/div><\/code><\/td>

2024-02<\/td>Bug<\/td>101773<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Dispatching and confirmation<\/td>In empties transactions (in tour confirmation form), it was previously not possible to manually adjust empties quantity (as empties quantity fields were disable for user changes)<\/td>2024-02<\/td>Bug<\/td>101387<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Dispatching and confirmation<\/td>
'Automatic exchange' empties parameter (on transport address) was previously not working<\/summary>

The empties transactions were generated as 'unbalanced' even when 'Automatic exchange' was activated on transport address.<\/p><\/details><\/div><\/code><\/td>

2024-02<\/td>Bug<\/td>101384<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Subcontracting\/IC invoicing<\/td>
Manual surcharges invoice lines missing from journal when posting a collective subcontracting order<\/summary>

In the new subcontracting harmonization world, in the particular constellation when a subcontracting order of type Tr-Leg contained manual surcharges and was also added to a collective subcontracting order, the invoice lines corresponding to the manual surcharges were missing from the invoice journal during posting, which led to process-stopping errors. This is now fixed.<\/p><\/details><\/div><\/code><\/td>

2024-02<\/td>Bug<\/td>101312<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Customer order management and pricing<\/td>Contact person primary & secondary phone were previously not populated for load\/unload contacts<\/td>2024-02<\/td>Bug<\/td>100795<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Dispatching and confirmation<\/td>
Removal of depot split does not trigger rough scheduling<\/summary>

Fix issue where removal of depot split did not trigger scheduling of the follower transport legs. This would leave gaps or inconsistent dates on the transport legs.<\/p><\/details><\/div><\/code><\/td>

2024-02<\/td>Bug<\/td>100071<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Customer order management and pricing<\/td>
KNOWN ISSUE: Transport Orders with blank Means of Transport cannot be dispatched in some data constellations<\/summary>

At the time of upgrade, there may be some transport orders without any predefined 'Means of transport' (if, for example, imported as such).
\nUnder the new setup of means of transport on every transport type (feature brought with #92553), in case there is a specific means of transport defined on transport type, the transport legs from such transport orders may not in all cases be plannable in tours, due to differing means on transport on leg vs tour.
\nThis will be solved in R40 with a data migration job which will initialize the means of transport on all transport orders from transport type setup.
\n
\nMeanwhile, possible workarounds:
\n - manual update of means of transport on transport orders (that are still in 'Registered' status at the moment of upgrade)
\n - bulk update of means of transport on transport orders directly in grid (feature available in D365 starting with product version 38)
\n
\nCAPcargo consultants can provide further guidance.
\nThis known issue is valid only for transport orders existing in the system at the moment of update. Any transport orders created after upgrade will always have a means of transport, if either imported or default selected on transport type.<\/p><\/details><\/div><\/code><\/td>

2024-02<\/td>Known issue<\/td>103522<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Subcontracting\/IC order management & pricing<\/td>KNOWN ISSUE: 'Calculated' flag on subcontracting order header was not reset to 'False' when 'Calculated' flag on subcontracting order line becomes 'False'<\/td>2024-02<\/td>Known issue<\/td>103901<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"","protected":false},"author":4,"featured_media":0,"parent":0,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"100-width.php","meta":{"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"footnotes":""},"class_list":["post-12419","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"yoast_head":"\n10.0-CAP39.0 (02.02.2024) - CAPcargo AG<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.capcargo.com\/en\/10-0-cap39-0-02-02-2024\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_GB\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"10.0-CAP39.0 (02.02.2024) - CAPcargo AG\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.capcargo.com\/en\/10-0-cap39-0-02-02-2024\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"CAPcargo AG\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/pages\/category\/Software-Company\/CAPcargo-AG-148899175228689\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.capcargo.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/02\/CAPcargo-logo-cmyk.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"250\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"57\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Estimated reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"4 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.capcargo.com\/10-0-cap39-0-02-02-2024\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.capcargo.com\/10-0-cap39-0-02-02-2024\/\",\"name\":\"10.0-CAP39.0 (02.02.2024) - CAPcargo AG\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.capcargo.com\/en\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2024-02-02T16:31:46+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.capcargo.com\/10-0-cap39-0-02-02-2024\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-GB\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.capcargo.com\/10-0-cap39-0-02-02-2024\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.capcargo.com\/10-0-cap39-0-02-02-2024\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Startseite\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.capcargo.com\/en\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"10.0-CAP39.0 (02.02.2024)\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.capcargo.com\/en\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.capcargo.com\/en\/\",\"name\":\"CAPcargo AG\",\"description\":\"Consulting and Software Applications for cargo industry\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.capcargo.com\/en\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.capcargo.com\/en\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-GB\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.capcargo.com\/en\/#organization\",\"name\":\"CAPcargo AG\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.capcargo.com\/en\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-GB\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.capcargo.com\/en\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.capcargo.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/02\/CAPcargo-logo-cmyk.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.capcargo.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/02\/CAPcargo-logo-cmyk.jpg\",\"width\":250,\"height\":57,\"caption\":\"CAPcargo AG\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.capcargo.com\/en\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/pages\/category\/Software-Company\/CAPcargo-AG-148899175228689\/\",\"https:\/\/www.linkedin.com\/company\/capcargo-ag\/?viewAsMember=true\"]}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"10.0-CAP39.0 (02.02.2024) - CAPcargo AG","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.capcargo.com\/en\/10-0-cap39-0-02-02-2024\/","og_locale":"en_GB","og_type":"article","og_title":"10.0-CAP39.0 (02.02.2024) - CAPcargo AG","og_url":"https:\/\/www.capcargo.com\/en\/10-0-cap39-0-02-02-2024\/","og_site_name":"CAPcargo AG","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/pages\/category\/Software-Company\/CAPcargo-AG-148899175228689\/","og_image":[{"width":250,"height":57,"url":"https:\/\/www.capcargo.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/02\/CAPcargo-logo-cmyk.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Estimated reading time":"4 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.capcargo.com\/10-0-cap39-0-02-02-2024\/","url":"https:\/\/www.capcargo.com\/10-0-cap39-0-02-02-2024\/","name":"10.0-CAP39.0 (02.02.2024) - CAPcargo AG","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.capcargo.com\/en\/#website"},"datePublished":"2024-02-02T16:31:46+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.capcargo.com\/10-0-cap39-0-02-02-2024\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-GB","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.capcargo.com\/10-0-cap39-0-02-02-2024\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.capcargo.com\/10-0-cap39-0-02-02-2024\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Startseite","item":"https:\/\/www.capcargo.com\/en\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"10.0-CAP39.0 (02.02.2024)"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.capcargo.com\/en\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.capcargo.com\/en\/","name":"CAPcargo AG","description":"Consulting and Software Applications for cargo industry","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.capcargo.com\/en\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.capcargo.com\/en\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-GB"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.capcargo.com\/en\/#organization","name":"CAPcargo AG","url":"https:\/\/www.capcargo.com\/en\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-GB","@id":"https:\/\/www.capcargo.com\/en\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.capcargo.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/02\/CAPcargo-logo-cmyk.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.capcargo.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/02\/CAPcargo-logo-cmyk.jpg","width":250,"height":57,"caption":"CAPcargo AG"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.capcargo.com\/en\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/pages\/category\/Software-Company\/CAPcargo-AG-148899175228689\/","https:\/\/www.linkedin.com\/company\/capcargo-ag\/?viewAsMember=true"]}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.capcargo.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/12419","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.capcargo.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.capcargo.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.capcargo.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/4"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.capcargo.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=12419"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.capcargo.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/12419\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":12420,"href":"https:\/\/www.capcargo.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/12419\/revisions\/12420"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.capcargo.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=12419"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}