National Postcodes to be introduced

clewbays

Bayberry wrote: »

what would be disasterous about it moving as long as it stayed within the same routing code?

It would be disastrous for database management as there would be an ongoing process of realigning addresses and Eircodes and then redundant Eircodes if a business failed.

Do Loc8 codes move with a business?

Bayberry

ukoda wrote: »

This is crazy, sure why not just allow them take their whole address with them, they move to a different area but keep their address.

I quite specifically said when moving to a diferent premises in the locality.

It's a ridiculous idea. They will have to change their entire postal address including their eircode when they move.

An address is an address. If you relocate you do not bring your address with you. You'd create an entire mess of a situation letting that happen.

The code is for the address. Keep it clean and simple like that

A Eircode IS NOT AN ADDRESS!!!!!! An Eircode is just a key into a database. There is absolutely no practical reason why any eircode within a given "routing code" can't move. One of the supposed advantages of eircodes is that adjacent premises don't have adjacent eircodes, so just what sort of a "mess" would be created by allowing a eircode to move?

It's bizarre that you are so opposed to the sole attribute of eircode that would give it an advantage over any other postcode in use anywhere in the world.

ukoda

Bayberry wrote: »

I quite specifically said when moving to a diferent premises in the locality.

A Eircode IS NOT AN ADDRESS!!!!!! An Eircode is just a key into a database. There is absolutely no practical reason why any eircode within a given "routing code" can't move. One of the supposed advantages of eircodes is that adjacent premises don't have adjacent eircodes, so just what sort of a "mess" would be created by allowing a eircode to move?

It's bizarre that you are so opposed to the sole attribute of eircode that would give it an advantage over any other postcode in use anywhere in the world.

I've gave my reasons why I think it's idiotic, as have other posters on here.

Eircodes become part of the properties address and addresses don't move. End of story.

clewbays

Bayberry wrote: »

It's bizarre that you are so opposed to the sole attribute of eircode that would give it an advantage over any other postcode in use anywhere in the world.

It is an innovative idea but it separates users into purpose groups, allowing it to move with a business turns it into a VAT number.

There were all kinds of possibilities - I am sure some addresses would have been prepared to pay for a vanity Eircode such as D04 OOO1 but functionality is what won out and that has rules and regulations.

Bayberry

clewbays wrote: »

It would be disastrous for database management as there would be an ongoing process of realigning addresses and Eircodes and then redundant Eircodes if a business failed.

So there'll be no database management issues adding new entries, but there'll be unsurmountable difficulties updating an existing entry? They're planning to demolish a bunch of houses to build the Galway bypass, imagine all those redundant eircodes wreaking absolute havoc on the database!!!

And you're not worried that such imcompetents will be allowed to run a database that the Minister reckons will be key to growing the Digital Economy?

Make up your mind - either the eircode database is robust enough to form the foundation for a fundamental part of the national infrastrurcture, or it's so fragile that it'll be totally bollixed by making a few updates. You can't have it both ways!

Do Loc8 codes move with a business?

Loc8 codes aren't tied to a database - they're just a compact version the GPS coordinates. If you're arguing that an eircode is an immutable pointer to a particular GPS location, why bother with the database lookup? It just imposes additional expense. If you decide to impose that expense on everyone anyway, then why not take advantage of the one added benefit that brings - allowing you to move the eircode?

Bayberry

ukoda wrote: »

And the sole purpose of eircode is not just to give a location a code. It's to assign a unique ADDRESS to each premises and also provide the geo coordinates for that premise. Like I've said before, having a postcode that doesn't validate an address against our national address database is a ridiculous idea.

ukoda wrote: »

This is crazy, sure why not just allow them take their whole address with them, they move to a different area but keep their address.

It's a ridiculous idea. They will have to change their entire postal address including their eircode when they move.

An address is an address. If you relocate you do not bring your address with you. You'd create an entire mess of a situation letting that happen.

The code is for the address. Keep it clean and simple like that

ukoda wrote: »

I've gave my reasons why I think it's idiotic, as have other posters on here.

Eircodes become part of the properties address and addresses don't move. End of story.

You're using rather circular logic here, and it's based on a fallacy. An eircode isn't an address. No ifs, ands or buts about it. It's simpley a key to a database that contains an address and/or geo-coordinates. If I give you an eircode it is completely impossible for you to deliver something to that eircode without doing a database lookup, unlike an address, which people have been able to find without using databases for centuries, or geo-coordinates, which people have been able to use to navigate to a destination since the Ordinance Survey started publishing maps!

You can wave your hands and stamp your feet all you like, but you haven't given a single practical reason why an eircode can't be moved with a business. In fact, I can almost guarantee that if eircodes ever prove to be as useful as their proponents suggest, that such moves will be allowed, for an appropriate fee, because

commercial considerations

.

TheBustedFlush

There is only one reason why the eircode is designed the way it is. Because it can be assigned to each individual address point. In effect, it could be just a string of numbers as long as they have a consistent look to them - so the first three characters represent a local post-town - which is of no use to anyone else but An Post. The last four don't have any pattern to them to help with recognition or any visual consistency.

This design could have easily been created by someone already working within the public service. Take 140 post-towns and give each of them a three characters prefix using a letter and two numbers. Then assign a series of letters and numbers to each of the addresses in those post-towns.

Why did this have to be put out to tender even? The criteria for the final design now appears to show that no consideration would be given to any other type of design - a post town had to be used. Why spend €2m on this when it could have been done by an existing public servant or two for a fraction of the cost?

The code could have been ten characters long apparently - meaning a smaller sub-area could have been incorporated into the post-town area but it wasn't.

So what advantage did involving a private sector company with no post code experience have over someone already working within a Govt Department in creating an identity code design that the state and An Post had already determined it wanted? None - it would appear.

The identity code will be delivered to each house address by an Post using its own internal database that it will be given legal status to use. In essence, An Post and the Department could have decided this in a couple of weeks and not wasted anybody else's time and money.

So why didn't that happen?

oscarBravo

Bayberry wrote: »

They're planning to demolish a bunch of houses to build the Galway bypass, imagine all those redundant eircodes wreaking absolute havoc on the database!!!

Fifty deletions is "wreaking havoc" on a database?




Seriously?

ukoda

Bayberry wrote: »

You're using rather circular logic here, and it's based on a fallacy. An eircode isn't an address. No ifs, ands or buts about it. It's simpley a key to a database that contains an address and/or geo-coordinates. If I give you an eircode it is completely impossible for you to deliver something to that eircode without doing a database lookup, unlike an address, which people have been able to find without using databases for centuries, or geo-coordinates, which people have been able to use to navigate to a destination since the Ordinance Survey started publishing maps!

You can wave your hands and stamp your feet all you like, but you haven't given a single practical reason why an eircode can't be moved with a business. In fact, I can almost guarantee that if eircodes ever prove to be as useful as their proponents suggest, that such moves will be allowed, for an appropriate fee, because

commercial considerations

.

It would create needless additional maintenance
It would only be of limited use in a very small scenario of a business relocating
It would cause confusion for the public
It would mean that for a period of time the eircode would be wrong on devices until the updates are pushed out
It would create additional maintenance for mapping companies to update their devices with more corrections than needed
If some companies are slow to push updates then the eircode will validate the incorrect address on their system

The list goes on

Bayberry

TheBustedFlush wrote: »

So why didn't that happen?

Because this is Ireland.

It doesn't matter whether it's incompetence, corruption, or just people making work for themselves. No one will ever be held to account either way, because nobody outside the inner circle will ever be able to find out what happened or why, unless things get so bad that whoever is currently in government can be embarrassed into a setting up an enquiry.

It's only €25 million, sure - who'd miss it!

Bayberry

ukoda wrote: »

It would create needless additional maintenance
It would only be of limited use in a very small scenario of a business relocating

It would only happen if the end user decided that it wasn't needless, and by your own admission it would only be a tiny fraction of the maintenance that will already be needed for new builds and demolitions.

It would cause confusion for the public

Seriously? How would it confuse the public? Does it confuse the public when a business moves but keeps the same phone number, or does that actually LESSEN confusion!

It would mean that for a period of time the eircode would be wrong on devices until the updates are pushed out

That would also be true if a business got a new eircode, because all their old letterheads and mailings have the old eircode on it.

If a business decides that its eircode is actually a useful reference for the type of business that it does, and that the disruption of a new eircode would be greater than the disruption of a taxi-man going to their old location (which is far more likely because they are told to go to the business park across the road from Murphys Bar than because they use the wrong eircode), why not let them choose to keep their eircode? For example a small mail order company woud find a new eircode quite disruptuve, but they could be pretty sure that An Post would be able to handle the fact that their eircode had moved, so they'd be able to move to new, bigger premises.

It would create additional maintenance for mapping companies to update their devices with more corrections than needed

They either do maintenance or they don't. It's not as if the mapping companies will be paying someone to type the updates in by hand - 10,000 updates won't create any more problems or cost than 9,500 updates

If some companies are slow to push updates then the eircode will validate the incorrect address on their system

So what. If Eircode is such a cumbersome mess to update that the benefit of updating the database doesn't justify the cost of doing so, that's hardly an argument against building new houses or demolishing to build new roads, so why would it be an argument against allowing a business to keep it's eircode.

The list of totally bogus reasons for opposing the single potentially useful attribute of eircode goes on

Bayberry

oscarBravo wrote: »

Fifty deletions is "wreaking havoc" on a database?


Seriously?

Well apparently, updating an entry from "Unit 29A, Murphys Business Park" to "Unit 12, Murphys Business Park" will endanger the structure of the whole database, so I'm sure fifty deletions will cause untold damage.

clewbays wrote: »

It would be disastrous for database management as there would be an ongoing process of realigning addresses and Eircodes and then redundant Eircodes if a business failed.

ukoda

Bayberry wrote: »

It would only happen if the end user decided that it wasn't needless, and by your own admission it would only be a tiny fraction of the maintenance that will already be needed for new builds and demolitions.
Seriously? How would it confuse the public? Does it confuse the public when a business moves but keeps the same phone number, or does that actually LESSEN confusion!
That would also be true if a business got a new eircode, because all their old letterheads and mailings have the old eircode on it.

If a business decides that its eircode is actually a useful reference for the type of business that it does, and that the disruption of a new eircode would be greater than the disruption of a taxi-man going to their old location (which is far more likely because they are told to go to the business park across the road from Murphys Bar than because they use the wrong eircode), why not let them choose to keep their eircode? For example a small mail order company woud find a new eircode quite disruptuve, but they could be pretty sure that An Post would be able to handle the fact that their eircode had moved, so they'd be able to move to new, bigger premises.

They either do maintenance or they don't. It's not as if the mapping companies will be paying someone to type the updates in by hand - 10,000 updates won't create any more problems or cost than 9,500 updates
So what. If Eircode is such a cumbersome mess to update that the benefit of updating the database doesn't justify the cost of doing so, that's hardly an argument against building new houses or demolishing to build new roads, so why would it be an argument against allowing a business to keep it's eircode.

Scenario: I'm moving my business so I will call my suppliers and service suppliers to update my address:

Let's say it's the bank

You: hello I need to give you my new address as we are relocating
Bank: ok what's the eircode of the new address?
You: oh it's the same eircode we are brining it with us
Bank: erm ok so what is that eircode?
You: A10 ABCD
Bank: ok that validates address ABC
You: no that's my current address
Bank: our system is linked to validate eircode and that's what it's showing for that code
You: ok so it's not updated
Bank: ok so what is the eircode of the new address
You: it's B10 FDGJ
Bank: ok that's address XYZ on our system
You: yeah that's it but it's not that eircode
Bank: ok well I'll have to update your details with what I can validate so I'll have to use that eircode
You: but that's not my eircode we are keeping it
Bank: well I can't just add that eircode to an address that doesn't validate it? The whole reason we use eircode is to validate addresses
You: I want my old eircode on my new address
Bank: well I can't do that till the database is updated so I'll have to use the new eircode for that address
Then I'll need some process to come back to your account later and re-validate your old eircode to see if it's the new address, so maybe I'll write it down somewhere and I'll keep checking for updates cos I'm a good employee and when it changes I'll get the system updated
But in the mean time your post will have the new eircode on it as that's all our system allows

Repeat convo for each service provider.

What an absolute mess of a joke your are proposing.

my3cents

Bayberry wrote: »

Well apparently, updating an entry from "Unit 29A, Murphys Business Park" to "Unit 12, Murphys Business Park" will endanger the structure of the whole database, so I'm sure fifty deletions will cause untold damage.

My understanding is that moving a eircode defeats the point of the eircode.

How far exactly can it be moved then? What happens to the old address does it get a new eircode - well thats daft because it already has one.

Its the address location that has the eircode not the business or the named person that lives at the address.

halkar

Thread was created 6 years ago and still no postcodes

Bayberry

ukoda wrote: »

Scenario: I'm moving my business so I will call my suppliers and service suppliers to update my address:

Let's say it's the bank

You: hello I need to give you my new address as we are relocating
Bank: ok what's the eircode of the new address?
You: oh it's the same eircode we are brining it with us
Bank: erm ok so what is that eircode?
You: A10 ABCD
Bank: ok that validates address ABC

Make up your mind - either the address and the eircode are always intrinsically linked, in which case the bank won't ask for both (even Irish banks aren't that stupid) or they're not intrinsically linked, in which case your arguement is completely groundless.

I guess from your username that you might be confused by thinking in terms of UK postcodes, which aren't unique, and which therefore need a full address to complete them, but that's not how eircodes are supposed to work.

ukoda

Bayberry wrote: »

Make up your mind - either the address and the eircode are always intrinsically linked, in which case the bank won't ask for both (even Irish banks aren't that stupid) or they're not intrinsically linked, in which case your arguement is completely groundless.

I guess from your username that you might be confused by thinking in terms of UK postcodes, which aren't unique, and which therefore need a full address to complete them, but that's not how eircodes are supposed to work.

You've missed my point completely and talking nonsense. Plus my user name is nothing to do with the UK.

Do you understand a bank will use eircode for address validation to help fraud prevention?

One eircode will return one address at a time, and it will be the wrong one until the database is updated, so what do, apply for the eircode to move and then wait 3 months for the database to update before calling the bank? Because that bank is using the eircode database to validate addresses from customers

I'm clearly more up to speed on eircode than you are if you can't see my point above.

When it dawns on you what I'm saying you'll realise how stupid you are being

antoinolachtnai

clewbays wrote: »

Minister White has told us that there will be an online tool available. This will enable all recipients to check whether the Eircode corresponds to their actual location. No doubt there may be some fraction of 1% of incorrect deliveries but these can be quickly corrected and presumably there is a financial penalty clause in the dissemination contract if the error rate exceeds a certain level. Rural Link and The Wheel will be available to provide assistance as required.

Rural Link and The Wheel have a PR contract to provide publicity services for eircode. They have nothing to do with the operation or support of the code (as I think you know).

Why do you think there will only be a one percent error rate?

Has the wording in the Amendment Bill been approved by the DPC?

How would I know that?

Bayberry

my3cents wrote: »

My understanding is that moving a eircode defeats the point of the eircode.

How does it defeat the point of eircode? As far as I can tell, the point of eircode is to point to a database entry, and if anything, creating an arbitrary rule that you can't change any entries in the database would defeat the purpose of using a database in the first place!!!!! Why not just use an unchangable physical attribute (like maybe geo-coordinates or a number and a street name) instead?

How far exactly can it be moved then?

Anywhere within it's routing code - if A67-Q15W and A67-Q15X can be 30km apart, why can't move 500m down the road?

What happens to the old address does it get a new eircode - well thats daft because it already has one.

What's daft about it? If a new building is built 15m away, it'll be assigned a new eircode, why would it be daft to assign a new eircode to an existing building if it's eircode was re-assigned?

Its the address location that has the eircode not the business or the named person that lives at the address.

That's simply a "because I said so" rationalization. What's the point in having the worlds only database driven postcode with completely random allocation of postcodes if you don't take advantage of it?

clewbays

Bayberry wrote: »

There is only one situation where the eircode approach might be advantageous to the public (rather than to Eircode PLC) and that's if a business was allowed to keep the same eircode if it moved to new premises in the same locality.

New builds are completely different. They have never had an Eircode so all you need is a systematic approach to identifying them and assigning an Eircode.

Moving Eircodes would break the fixed link to a location. Anyone who wanted to find the address not the occupant would be left waiting around until a new code is issued?

But the idea could work for Loc8 because there is no database complications. Say for example for a Vet. You give her the Loc8 code of where the animals are and keep updating the coordinates, it unravels to, as the cows move from field to field.

Bayberry

ukoda wrote: »

You've missed my point completely and talking nonsense.
I haven't missed your point - your point is nonsense! Unlike the UK postcode, there is no need to validate an address against it's eircode. If you're asking for (and receiving) an eircode, you don't need to ask for an address, because your own argument is that an eircode IS AN ADDRESS

ukoda wrote: »

And the sole purpose of eircode is not just to give a location a code. It's to assign a unique ADDRESS to each premises

More to the point, if I could move my eircode when I changed premises, I wouldn't have to call the bank in the first place! They'd already have my eircode!

One eircode will return one address at a time, and it will be the wrong one until the database is updated, so what do, apply for the eircode to move and then wait 3 months for the database to update before calling the bank? Because that bank is using the eircode database to validate addresses from customers

I'm clearly more up to speed on eircode than you are if you can't see my point above.

When it dawns on you what I'm saying you'll realise how stupid you are being

I'll let you think about this just a little bit longer, though now that you've dug your heels in, you're probably not going to admit how stupid your arguement is, but how exactly is a business that uses a single consistent eircode when moving between two premises going to be more of a fraud risk than a business that uses two different eircodes? It's not as if banks can use eircodes for mortgage/loan collateral purposes, because ther will be loads of premises that won't have any eircode. The same goes for insurance companies - you will be able to insure a barn even if it doesn't have an eircode.

This is just a bogeyman "won't someone think of the banks" type of arguement, that doesn't reflect how businesses will actually bbe able to do with eircodes.

ukoda

Bayberry wrote: »

You've missed my point completely and talking nonsense.
I haven't missed your point - your point is nonsense! Unlike the UK postcode, there is no need to validate an address against it's eircode. If you're asking for (and receiving) an eircode, you don't need to ask for an address, because your own argument is that an eircode IS AN ADDRESS



More to the point, if I could move my eircode when I changed premises, I wouldn't have to call the bank in the first place! They'd already have my eircode!

I'll let you think about this just a little bit longer, though now that you've dug your heels in, you're probably not going to admit how stupid your arguement is, but how exactly is a business that uses a single consistent eircode when moving between two premises going to be more of a fraud risk than a business that uses two different eircodes? It's not as if banks can use eircodes for mortgage/loan collateral purposes, because ther will be loads of premises that won't have any eircode. The same goes for insurance companies - you will be able to insure a barn even if it doesn't have an eircode.

This is just a bogeyman "won't someone think of the banks" type of arguement, that doesn't reflect how businesses will actually bbe able to do with eircodes.

Does anyone else want to comment here. I give up. I don't even know where to start

I never said ericode was an address, I said its part of the address

The comment "loads of premises won't have an eircode" goes to show how much you are talking out of your backside

Are you aware of what eircode even is? Every single premises in the country will have an eircode. That's the most basic fact about eircode. You don't know this?

Go away please, you are either trolling or writing incredibly stupid things out of pure ignorance.

Bayberry

clewbays wrote: »

New builds are completely different. They have never had an Eircode so all you need is a systematic approach to identifying them and assigning an Eircode.

Moving Eircodes would break the fixed link to a location. Anyone who wanted to find the address not the occupant would be left waiting around until a new code is issued?

Huh? The whole point of an eircode, is that, unlike an actual street address or geo-coordinates, there is no "fixed link to a location"! Anyone wanting to find any building that An Post doesn't deliver to is going to be wandering around too, but this doesn't seem to present an unsurmountable barrier (and there are a damn sight more such eircode-less buildings than will be created by allowing the reassignmnet of eircodes within a routing area).

But the idea could work for Loc8 because there is no database complications. Say for example for a Vet. You give her the Loc8 code of where the animals are and keep updating the coordinates, it unravels to, as the cows move from field to field.

Wow, you're good.

dr.fuzzenstein

OK, once again s l o w l y.
An Eircode is a code assigned to a dwelling, this could be a house or an apartment or a busoness. The code belongs to that dwelling and identifies it. If you move somewhere else, you will now have to use the code assigned to that dwelling.
Saying "but! but! I don't like that!" well, yeah, life is tough. Its not designed that way. If you buy a new car, what would happen if you demanded to carry over your old reg?

my3cents

Bayberry wrote: »

How does it defeat the point of eircode? As far as I can tell, the point of eircode is to point to a database entry, and if anything, creating an arbitrary rule that you can't change any entries in the database would defeat the purpose of using a database in the first place!!!!! Why not just use an unchangable physical attribute (like maybe geo-coordinates or a number and a street name) instead?

Anywhere within it's routing code - if A67-Q15W and A67-Q15X can be 30km apart, why can't move 500m down the road?

What's daft about it? If a new building is built 15m away, it'll be assigned a new eircode, why would it be daft to assign a new eircode to an existing building if it's eircode was re-assigned?

That's simply a "because I said so" rationalization. What's the point in having the worlds only database driven postcode with completely random allocation of postcodes if you don't take advantage of it?

This really is one of the dumber arguments about eircode!

The eircode is about the building location NOT the person or company that lives or has a busness there. The eircodes are being sent to the address (by some means) not to the people occupying those addresses. Therefore you do not own the eircode for the address of your home or your business.

The eircode database doesn't contain and can't itself afaik be linked to occupiers names so again why would the occupier be able to make a change to the eircode database when the eircode database doesn't care less about them or even know they exist.

dr.fuzzenstein

People are just grasping at straws now. The arguments against have passed demented a long time ago and we are deep into Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas sheer crazy.

Bayberry

ukoda wrote: »

Does anyone else want to comment here. I give up. I don't even know where to start

I never said ericode was an address, I said its part of the address

ukoda wrote: »

And the sole purpose of eircode is not just to give a location a code. It's to assign a unique ADDRESS to each premises

The comment "loads of premises won't have an eircode" goes to show how much you are talking out of your backside

Are you aware of what eircode even is? Every single premises in the country will have an eircode. That's the most basic fact about eircode. You don't know this?

The Eircode database makes it clear that the eircode database contains Postal Addresses. A barn in a field doesn't have a Postal address, but it's definitely a premises. I've seen a number of claims that the barn won't get an eircode, but I've never seen anyone challenge those claims, and there is absolutely nothing on the eircode website to support your position. What about the Intel campus - lot's of buildings, but only one postal address, as far as I know. Are you claiming that Intel with get a whole bunch of eircodes assigned to them?

Go away please, you are either trolling or writing incredibly stupid things out of pure ignorance.

I'm pointing out the inconsistency of people who support a database driven postcode, but are apparently rabidly opposed to one of the obvious advantages it could deliver. It's obvious that having that logical inconsistency pointed out is upsetting you, but it's not trolling!

Seth Brundle

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

Saying "but! but! I don't like that!" well, yeah, life is tough. Its not designed that way. If you buy a new car, what would happen if you demanded to carry over your old reg?

That system works fine in the UK!

Bayberry

my3cents wrote: »

This really is one of the dumber arguments about eircode!

It's not an argument against eircode - I'm simply asking why an obvious feature of a databased postal code won't be available. The only response so far has been "because we say so" (and a couple of sad circular arguments from people who can't figure out whether eircodes are addresses or not).

The eircode database doesn't contain and can't itself afaik be linked to occupiers names so again why would the occupier be able to make a change to the eircode database when the eircode database doesn't care less about them or even know they exist.

Who said anything about linking the eircode to the occupants name? I said that it would be useful for a business to be able to apply to have an eircode moved to a different ADDRESS. Eircode PLC can set up whatever authentication process they think is necessary, and charge for it. And if the eircode database doesn't care, it doesn't care whether it's updated either - it's just data after all.

Mobile postcodes, this thread is getting sillier the closer we get to the "launch".