Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
National Postcodes to be introduced
Options
Comments
-
-
Someone earlier mentioned pluscodes - http://plus.codes
Not sure if it's part of google or backed by them, but is this not EXACTLY what Loc8 is ?
FAQ from site:What is a plus+code?
A plus+code is a short code made up of six or seven letters and numbers, like MQRG+59, or combined with a town or city like this MQRG+59 Nairobi.
They let you give someone an exact location that doesn't depend on street names or building numbers.
How do I find out where a plus+code is?
When you enter a plus+code (MQRG+59) on your phone or computer, it will find the nearest match. This will return the correct location as long as you are within about 40 kilometers of the place.
If you are further away, use the town or city name (MQRG+59 Nairobi), or enter the plus+code including the region code (6GCRMQRG+59).
Do I need to apply for a plus+code?
No, plus+codes already exist for everywhere and anyone can use them for free.
To get the plus+code for a place just drag the map to highlight the place you want.
What are the parts of the code?
For our example code 6GCRMQRG+59, 6GCR is the region code (roughly 100 x 100 kilometers). MQ is the city code (5 x 5 kilometers). RG is the neighbourhood code (250 x 250 meters). After the +, 59 is the building code (14 x 14 meters). It can be followed by a single digit door code, if the building size code extends over more than one building.
Usually, the region code isn't needed, and sometimes you will be able to drop the city code as well.
Does a location have more than one plus+code?
No. Any place only has one plus+code.
Can I save them?
To save a plus+code, just create a bookmark for the page. When you open the bookmark, it will show you the place.
Can I use this when I don't have a network?
Yes! After you have loaded this page on your phone or computer, it will keep a copy and let you load it even without a network connection.
Can I get directions?
There is a compass mode that shows you the direction and distance from where you are to the current plus+code. The main menu has links to different map providers you can use.
My plus+code area is too large!
If you zoom in further, the code will be for a smaller area.
The address you show is wrong!
The address given is just a suggestion. It is used to reduce the length of the code you need to use. You can try other addresses in the search box.0 -
Someone earlier mentioned pluscodes - http://plus.codes
Not sure if it's part of google or backed by them, but is this not EXACTLY what Loc8 is ?
http://google-opensource.blogspot.ch/2015/04/open-location-code-addresses-for.html
http://openlocationcode.com/
Kinda the end for Loc8 continued limited use I'd imagine... It's global (Loc8 is only the island of Ireland) and supported by Google Maps. Loc8 isn't on Google Maps and any hopes they had of being on Google maps for Ireland has been given a bit of a kicking.
Wonder if they'll be a Facebook and Twitter driven "GetLostPlusCodes" campaign against it...
EDIT:
Loc8 can pinpoint a location to plus/minus 6m accuracy.
PlusCodes pinpoint an area 14m x 14m.0 -
marmurr1916 wrote: »If Loc8 codes are so great, why is it still an SME? It should surely be a major force in the geocoding sector, not just in Ireland but internationally, by now?marmurr1916 wrote: »I said some people on this thread thought Loc8 was great. You asked for quotes, I supplied them. Now you're whinging that the quotes supplied aren't numerous enough
I'm not whinging. You had a question, based on what you claim other people are stating on this thread. Now you've identified the people that made these claims years ago. So why don't you go and ask them your question - apart from the fact that two of the 3 were banned over 3 years ago (for reasons probably not unrelated to your question)? And the 3rd poster didn't make the claim that you attribute to them anyway.
Now that you mention it, though, "If Loc8 codes are so great, why is it still an SME?" comes across as one of the whingiest sentences on this thread in a long time.0 -
Jack180570 wrote: »But Eircode doesn't work on satnav Ukoda. .. so that's another totally irrelevant comment... again. Loc8 Code works on satnav.
I think you might have missed the part where Garmin have confirmed they are working on bringing ericode to their devices. Or do you just choose to ignore that part.0 -
Advertisement
-
They're both geo-codes, so they both translate directly to GPS co-ordinates, but are a little bit easier for people to use/remember. There are lots of ways to do this type of transformation, with varying degrees of ease of use or accuracy or error correction or other features that may be helpful in different circumstances.Someone earlier mentioned pluscodes - http://plus.codes
Not sure if it's part of google or backed by them, but is this not EXACTLY what Loc8 is ?
Loc8 codes were designed for use in Ireland, based on the geographical size of the island, so they are slightly more accurate than Plus+ codes, and they're somewhat easier to recognize/parse and they're already supported by Garmin but Plus+ codes are worldwide, and are supported by Google, so they have a better chance of widespread adoption.
For example, if Dublin Bus wanted to put a code on every bus stop, Loc8 might be a technically better code for their purposes, (better accuracy, only used in Ireland) but if Air BnB wanted to use a geo-code to locate properties, Plus+ codes would be a better choice, because they work every where.
Horses for courses.0 -
I think you might have missed the part where Garmin have confirmed they are working on bringing ericode to their devices. Or do you just choose to ignore that part.
Garmin have confirmed that they're looking into it. That might mean that they're waiting to see how much eircode are going to pay them to support the adoption of eircode, because they don't think they can charge customers the full cost of supporting eircode, or it might mean that eircode will only be supported on new high end models, or it might mean that they add eircodes into their mapping database for customers who already have "free lifetime map updates", or that eircodes will only be supported in their desktop software with the option to transfer a route to the GPS unit (a very handy feature for the handful of users who actually avail of it).
We don't know yet. What we do know is that Garmin hasn't given any definite indication that they will be supporting eircodes in the futures, or when that support might come about. I don't know what the market for new standalone GPS units is like, but I imagine it's quite a bit smaller than it was 2 or 3 years ago, given the competition from smartphones, so the scope for spreading the cost of supporting eircodes over new hardware purchases is limited.
Given that support for eircodes is more likely to benefit eircode PLC than Garmin PLC, I'd like to be a fly on the wall during the discussions between the two!0 -
-
No ****, Sherlock! Are any of them geo-codes?Carawaystick wrote: »Dublin bus already have at least one code on each bus stop....
I was simply providing an easily understood example of the relative strengths and weaknesses of two different geo-coding schemes.
A bit like the way a teacher in First Class might ask the class "If Sean puts 2 apples on the table and Sally puts 3 apples on the table, how many apples are on the table".
I'll be sure to pitch my examples closer to a Junior Infants level in the future.0 -
-
Advertisement
-
Where do the come up with the names for these codes? Plus plus codes, lock eight codes, air codes....0
-
By that definition, 27 Murphy Street, BalllyWhatever, Co Something is a geo-code.Carawaystick wrote: »If you mean a code that maps to a specific location on Earth, then they are geo-codes
So, no, that's not what I meant.0 -
Join Date:Posts: 5746
Just to muddy the waters a little more, Garmin don't produce the maps that are used in their GPS systems, I'm not completely sure who it is now, they used to be called Navteq, and their mapping information is used by a wide range of companies, and it will very much be a case of them also being involved with ALL their customers to arrive at a solution that suits all of them.
Yes, there's not as many stand alone GPS units as there used to be, but then there are significantly more GPS units built in to the modern vehicle fleet, and they all need updated and accurate databases. Increasingly, new vehicles will have navigation systems built in, and some of the latest thinking is that they will be automatically able to report accidents to a central control centre (via mobile technology), with ways to alert emergency services if the collision exceeds certain limits.
Eircode won't figure in that sort of scenario, as their system doesn't have the ability to generate an Eircode based on a geo location, which is one of the issues that's been harped on about ad nauseum through this thread, and there are good arguments on both sides for the decision that's been made.
I've said it before, and I will probably say it again, it's my own opinion that "instructions" were issued to Eircode that their system had to be done in such a way that someone using "My house name" some street, ballgobackwards did not get a different code from another person in the same house but using 99 some street ballygobackwards. All the geocode options that have been outlined previously could be abused by having slight differences between opposite ends of the property, but by having a centrally controlled and administered system that's absolutely and specifically tied to specific physical locations and address variations, it will in time mean that if an address does not validate to the Eircode given, appropriate warning flags can be waved by computer systems to ensure that checks are carried out to remove the inconsistency, and that WILL have significant fraud prevention implications in a number of sensitive areas, and I would be reasonably confident that such fraud prevention was high on the list of specific reasons for the final decision about the code structure.
We have a decision made about the structure and methodology of Eircode, and it could be argued about (and probably will by some on this thread) for eternity, but it won't change the decisions that have been made, and you may be very sure that the relevant departments of Central Government will not be prepared to accept any criticism that the final choice is in any way flawed, even if it is, so bluntly, continuing to argue about the relative merits of Loc8, or any other alternative, is becoming boring, and counter productive, and a very real waste of time and electrons.Shore, if it was easy, everybody would be doin it.😁
0 -
Yeah, but that's not actually the case, as I've pointed out in reply to you before.Irish Steve wrote: »I've said it before, and I will probably say it again, it's my own opinion that "instructions" were issued to Eircode that their system had to be done in such a way that someone using "My house name" some street, ballgobackwards did not get a different code from another person in the same house but using 99 some street ballygobackwards. All the geocode options that have been outlined previously could be abused by having slight differences between opposite ends of the property, but by having a centrally controlled and administered system that's absolutely and specifically tied to specific physical locations and address variations, it will in time mean that if an address does not validate to the Eircode given, appropriate warning flags can be waved by computer systems to ensure that checks are carried out to remove the inconsistency, and that WILL have significant fraud prevention implications in a number of sensitive areas, and I would be reasonably confident that such fraud prevention was high on the list of specific reasons for the final decision about the code structure.
To achieve the requirement above, you need a database of "official" postcodes. it makes no difference whether those codes are random, or whether they are geocodes.
With Eircode, there are many many codes that look valid (they fit the basic syntax and have a valid routing key) but are not in the database. You have to check the database to determine this.
With a geocode, each address would have an official postcode generated from its official location in the Geodirectory. Each address only has one such code. The fact that other codes exist that are located in the same property is beside the point. From a validation point of view, it is exactly the same situation. Any application that requires unique codes, will simply reject the unofficial ones.
The official codes could be called "postcodes" and all other codes could be referred to as "location codes".
Yet, you and others continue to post .. In any case, the controversy isn't going to go away until people can actually see the code being used in the way they expected - primarily for courier deliveries.We have a decision made about the structure and methodology of Eircode, and it could be argued about (and probably will by some on this thread) for eternity, but it won't change the decisions that have been made, and you may be very sure that the relevant departments of Central Government will not be prepared to accept any criticism that the final choice is in any way flawed, even if it is, so bluntly, continuing to argue about the relative merits of Loc8, or any other alternative, is becoming boring, and counter productive, and a very real waste of time and electrons.0 -
With a geocode, each address would have an official postcode generated from its official location in the Geodirectory. Each address only has one such code. The fact that other codes exist that are located in the same property is beside the point. From a validation point of view, it is exactly the same situation. Any application that requires unique codes, will simply reject the unofficial ones.
The official codes could be called "postcodes" and all other codes could be referred to as "location codes".
This idea of official and unofficial codes for the same property is madness from the point of view of many users of the database. It may make sense for the couriers, you hold so dear, but the needs of users wanting to visit a single property (health worker, social welfare, ambulance, etc.) or to use Eircode as a unique reference number for an address would be severely set back.0 -
How are people still trotting out this kind of tripe after all the discussion on this thread?Irish Steve wrote: »I've said it before, and I will probably say it again, it's my own opinion that "instructions" were issued to Eircode that their system had to be done in such a way that someone using "My house name" some street, ballgobackwards did not get a different code from another person in the same house but using 99 some street ballygobackwards. All the geocode options that have been outlined previously could be abused by having slight differences between opposite ends of the property, but by having a centrally controlled and administered system that's absolutely and specifically tied to specific physical locations and address variations, it will in time mean that if an address does not validate to the Eircode given, appropriate warning flags can be waved by computer systems to ensure that checks are carried out to remove the inconsistency, and that WILL have significant fraud prevention implications in a number of sensitive areas,
If you maintain a database of "official" geocodes, you maintain a database of official geocodes. End of story. If someone uses a working geocode that isn't on the official list, no problem - either reject it entirely, or correct it by changing it to the "official" geocode for that particular location.
Right, so we should just suck it up. Just like we did with eVoting machines.We have a decision made about the structure and methodology of Eircode, and it could be argued about (and probably will by some on this thread) for eternity, but it won't change the decisions that have been made, and you may be very sure that the relevant departments of Central Government will not be prepared to accept any criticism that the final choice is in any way flawed, even if it is, so bluntly, continuing to argue about the relative merits of Loc8, or any other alternative, is becoming boring, and counter productive, and a very real waste of time and electrons.
The issue here is accountability. Even if it's too late to recover from the lost opportunity to implement a world class system, Ireland can't afford to keep ignoring mistakes like this. Unexplained technically illogical decisions made in back rooms that are "explained" by speculation only lead to unhealthy cynicism about how the country is run. The answer to this is not to shut up a take what you're given, it's to stop making unexplained back room deals in the first place.0 -
You keep stating this, as though it will become truer the more often you state it. It's baloney! There will only be "official" codes in the database - database uses can simply ignore the existence of "unofficial codes if they want.This idea of official and unofficial codes for the same property is madness from the point of view of many users of the database.0 -
It's probably the simplest solution for the public to accept though. Provide them with a branded system where codes can only be officially created, no self generation. It avoids the whole problem of having to explain the difference between official and unofficial codes.You keep stating this, as though it will become truer the more often you state it. It's baloney! There will only be "official" codes in the database - database uses can simply ignore the existence of "unofficial codes if they want.
If someone who didn't understand the concept of databases found an unofficial code for their property (maybe somebody generated it for them one time they wanted something delivered to the back gate or something) tried to use one on an official form it could cause confusion, with the blame inevitably being landed on the code provider. In other threads we had people saying they expected Eircodes to work when they downloaded the Loc8 update for their Garmin, and these are people who are technically minded enough to go and find and install that add-on. Imagine if you had to divide Eircodes into official and unofficial.
There's an argument for keeping the system pure, for lack of a better word, where every code is official. It makes the system simpler and more foolproof. Loc8, Openpostcode, and Plus codes still exist, people who understand the difference aren't prevented from using them.0 -
That just means that you’ve hammered a strawman. Pointing to another code to illustrate missing functionality in Eircode is very different from claiming it is the best thing since whatever.marmurr1916 wrote: »Because apparently it's the best thing since buttered sliced bread. Or at least that's the impression that a few people on this thread are trying to give.
And I’ve pointed out that there are actually two distinct issues involved here, which your argument completely ignores (as thus fails). The address verification has to be a monopoly, but the whole range of other services that the national postcode can facilitate doesn’t – and it is on these other services that a monopoly is a bad thing.I've posted what I believe to be the logical outcome of their argument that state monopolies are a bad thing.
I strongly disagree. The complete discarding of expertise gathered during the consultation period needs to be mentioned again and again. That a design was chosen that crippled interoperability (thus creating a mountain of ‘edge cases’ and stifling innovation) needs to mentioned again and again. That geocode functionality, which was discussed many times during submissions, was stripped out for no justifiable reason needs to be mentioned again and again.Autoaddress wrote: »…. but continuing to argue about what design would have been better is now pointless.
That the public consultation failed this fecking badly with Eircode, then what possible recourse do I as a taxpayer have in trying to stop it failing this fecking badly in the future other than shouting from the rooftops.
This is the sort of posting that has, for me, been the most disappointing thing about this thread. Rather than attempting to address the substance underlying the complaint (which is that Eircode is useless for non-indexed locations) you instead pick on a (rather pointless imo) factual error to hammer on.Claims of who won't be using Eircode, how it can't be used by certain industries, can't fit on Sat-Navs, etc. will be refuted with evidence in the coming months in the same manner as claims that the Rock of Cashel ….
Where it gets most disappointing is when these same people who will hammer on what is an irrelevancy will occassionaly make a posting like this: “Last week saw the integration by Google Maps of PlusCodes, a worldwide open standard location code, free for anyone to adopt. We would encourage those who need to deliver to non-building locations to investigate this.”. That such a posting is a complete and utter admission that Eircode is useless for non-indexed locations obviously escapes you.
And by the way, this sort of investigation into locational codes was done during the consultation period - only to be later ignored for, as I said before, no justifiable reason.
Convenient.I don't generally read your posts, they are too long.
I’m going to hold you to that. Here is the primary question I want a good answer to:If you put your points or questions in a couple one-line bullet points, I will have a go at answering.
”Given that I demonstrated earlier in the tread that it was possible to connect a geocode to a database to have the address validation functionality, how can the decision to abandon all the geocode functionality be justified?”
I have quoted at length from submissions that argued the advantages of having a geocode base.
I have explained in depth how having a geocode base dramatically aids interoperability.
I have responded, in some cases with excruciating detail, to each and every reason I have seen offered to the above question and demonstrated why those reasons fail.
I want a good answer that doesn’t rest on the poor reasonings that have been paraded out so far in this thread. Not optimistic though, and I’m expecting you to merely rehash some of the same (already debunked) points you’ve posted previously – points that were thoroughly addressed in those longs posts you apparently don’t read.
This needs some supporting argumentation to be honest. Given that geocode are inherently about location finding I don’t see why the above would be true.It may make sense for the couriers, you hold so dear, but the needs of users wanting to visit a single property (health worker, social welfare, ambulance, etc.) or to use Eircode as a unique reference number for an address would be severely set back.
Said much better than I ever did.The issue here is accountability. Even if it's too late to recover from the lost opportunity to implement a world class system, Ireland can't afford to keep ignoring mistakes like this. Unexplained technically illogical decisions made in back rooms that are "explained" by speculation only lead to unhealthy cynicism about how the country is run. The answer to this is not to shut up a take what you're given, it's to stop making unexplained back room deals in the first place.
Genuinely, why do you believe this? The official codes would be posted to every household in the country. If someone isn’t technical I fail to buy the argument that they would somehow self-generate a code, nor to I buy the argument that someone who was technical would give such a self-generated to such a non-technical person.TheChizler wrote: »It's probably the simplest solution for the public to accept though.
As it stands right now I have had to explain to people, multiple times, to that it isn’t possible for their outhouse or farm or building site to have an Eircode – would it be a fair argument to say this demonstrates that current Eircode isn’t simple? Don’t get me started with people who have suddenly found they live in a different country, they just aren’t able to grasp that one.
In either system you’re going to have these sorts of issues. The key question is whether completely dispensing with geocode functionality is justified by the claim that current Eircode is supposedly simpler? I think the claim of being simpler isn’t even true to begin with, so I’d doubt you’d do a good job even getting to the balancing act.
The problem that plagued Loc8 and OpenPostcode was that they were not officially recognised standards. A seal of approval from the state is needed for any proposed geocode to enter into widespread use. Part of the argument for a national postcode was that it would provide such a standard (that seems like a funny cruel joke now given how it has turned out). The lack of state approval is, in a sense, preventing people from using these tools.Loc8, Openpostcode, and Plus codes still exist, people who understand the difference aren't prevented from using them.
I now have to reply to an email to explain to someone that they will still have to send us GPS coordinates, and then try to explain to them that they won’t be able to get an Eircode to every new site they want a delivery to. Fun stuff.0 -
I would say that it's a complication, and unfortunately when you're rolling out something at such a scale, you need to focus on how it can be used by those with no understanding of it. In my experience if you create an alternative use of something, people will use it, and get it confused with the original use. Look at the confusion (at times outrage) when people were informed of their official postal address, some people can't grasp that there may be two versions of the same concept that apply to the same thing. If you tell them to use the official one they can't see why they shouldn't be able to use the unofficial one. An Post regularly have to put Incorrect Address stickers on post.Genuinely, why do you believe this? The official codes would be posted to every household in the country. If someone isn’t technical I fail to buy the argument that they would somehow self-generate a code, nor to I buy the argument that someone who was technical would give such a self-generated to such a non-technical person.
I'm not saying that was the only motivating factor. I think there's also a great benefit to codes being pseudo-random. Among other reasons.In either system you’re going to have these sorts of issues. The key question is whether completely dispensing with geocode functionality is justified by the claim that current Eircode is supposedly simpler? I think the claim of being simpler isn’t even true to begin with, so I’d doubt you’d do a good job even getting to the balancing act.
I do think they should have broken down the postal districts further, but there are electronic solutions for that (which of course you have to pay for), look at Autoaddress's recent blog for instance. They have an application that basically divides the postal areas into sensible delivery areas.0 -
Advertisement
-
Convenient.
I’m going to hold you to that. Here is the primary question I want a good answer to:
”Given that I demonstrated earlier in the tread that it was possible to connect a geocode to a database to have the address validation functionality, how can the decision to abandon all the geocode functionality be justified?”
I have quoted at length from submissions that argued the advantages of having a geocode base.
I have explained in depth how having a geocode base dramatically aids interoperability.
I have responded, in some cases with excruciating detail, to each and every reason I have seen offered to the above question and demonstrated why those reasons fail.
I want a good answer that doesn’t rest on the poor reasonings that have been paraded out so far in this thread. Not optimistic though, and I’m expecting you to merely rehash some of the same (already debunked) points you’ve posted previously – points that were thoroughly addressed in those longs posts you apparently don’t read.
I think you should moderate your tone. You are not entitled to anything from anyone here, and I am answering you as a courtesy.
You seem to think that you are entitled to be considered correct unless someone can prove to your satisfaction that you aren't. It doesn't work like that. You didn't 'demonstrate' anything. You gave your opinion. Other people have different opinions, which are no less valid.
My opinion is that, because of our problem with non-unique addresses, any code that is increasingly similar for increasingly close properties is a bad idea, be it sequential or geocode. It appears that the designers of Eircode agree, along with the designers of every other postcode that I am aware of internationally.
You have suggested a solution to the geocode problem of multiple codes applying to a property, and I'm sure you could suggest something for the proximity/similarity problem too. It seems to me that all the solutions to the geocode are basically making it less like a geocode and more like Eircode, which begs the question why not just use Eircode?
I can't see a reason to use geocode-plus-multiple-fixes rather than Eircode, unless you view it as an emergency to not use Eircode which, from your tone, seems to be the case. If that's your view, fine, but I don't think that very many other people view it like that.
I will not respond again if you are uncivil.0 -
Yes. It's also useless for non-Irish locations, for placing phone calls, and for finding recipes for Thai dishes....Eircode is useless for non-indexed locations...
The reason is simple: those things are not what it's for.
If your primary criticism of a postcode is that it's not useful for identifying places other than postal addresses, you may have missed the point of what a postcode actually is.
What's the postcode for the top of Ben Nevis?That such a posting is a complete and utter admission that Eircode is useless for non-indexed locations obviously escapes you.
Assuming you mean "county", the number of people who suddenly found they live in a different county as a result of Eircodes is precisely zero.Don’t get me started with people who have suddenly found they live in a different country, they just aren’t able to grasp that one.0 -
Join Date:Posts: 19390
TheChizler wrote: »
I do think they should have broken down the postal districts further, but there are electronic solutions for that (which of course you have to pay for), look at Autoaddress's recent blog for instance. They have an application that basically divides the postal areas into sensible delivery areas.
An Post already have them broken down from 139 to some 2,000 but for some reason amalgamated them into 139. This would mean there would be 1,000 addresses per routing code - much more manageable.0 -
On what do you base this opinion?My opinion is that, because of our problem with non-unique addresses, any code that is increasingly similar for increasingly close properties is a bad idea, be it sequential or geocode. It appears that the designers of Eircode agree, along with the designers of every other postcode that I am aware of internationally.
Do the UK postcodes not look increasing similar with increasing geographical proximity?
IMO a code with a logical hierarchy is an advantage.0 -
-
oscarBravo wrote: »If your primary criticism of a postcode is that it's not useful for identifying places other than postal addresses, you may have missed the point of what a postcode actually is.
An Post don't need it, the courier companies can't afford it and it doesn't work on satnav so general public can't use it. ... Remind me again who is it of use to? ???0 -
That could definitely be more useful, but with smaller obvious areas you get problems like postcode snobbery or property values arbitrarily being related to the postcode, obviously these are undesirable. How they came up with the final number I don't know.Sam Russell wrote: »An Post already have them broken down from 139 to some 2,000 but for some reason amalgamated them into 139. This would mean there would be 1,000 addresses per routing code - much more manageable.0 -
Jack180570 wrote: »An Post don't need it, the courier companies can't afford it and it doesn't work on satnav so general public can't use it. ... Remind me again who is it of use to? ???
yet
a bit of augmented reality stuff like this for eircodes n it'll be grand
0 -
Less of the patronizing comments please. Constructive posts only.No ****, Sherlock! Are any of them geo-codes?
I was simply providing an easily understood example of the relative strengths and weaknesses of two different geo-coding schemes.
A bit like the way a teacher in First Class might ask the class "If Sean puts 2 apples on the table and Sally puts 3 apples on the table, how many apples are on the table".
I'll be sure to pitch my examples closer to a Junior Infants level in the future.
Moderator0 -
Advertisement
-
On what do you base this opinion?
Do the UK postcodes not look increasing similar with increasing geographical proximity?
IMO a code with a logical hierarchy is an advantage.
Yes, you are correct, UK codes are increasingly similar with increasing proximity, but the UK addressing system is different. Every road - even in the back end of the Sperrin Mountains - has a name displayed and every house has a number.
I base my opinion on my experience. I grew up on a road that had a townland name that it shared with maybe five other roads, and no numbers. This situation is very common. Not only did the houses have no address elements to distinguish them, they also were frequently built by splitting up farms to make plots for sons, grandsons, and cousins; so the family names and often even the first names were repeated within the same address.
Pre-Eircode, one postie here said the strategy was to ring the doorbell and say 'Are you expecting a letter from the VHI?', or they had to just guess, and hope that misdelivered letters would be passed on. The privacy consequences where, say, financial documents were sent to the wrong member of the same family are obvious.
A hierarchical code would distinguish such houses by just a single character.
Eircode took the view that wasn't nearly enough, and in my opinion that is correct. They went to great lengths to make the system error proof, so houses with similar or identical address have starkly different Eircodes.
They even made sure that houses that are not proximate, but have similar addresses, have starkly similar postcodes. So all the the properties in all of the five different 'Warrenstowns' in county Meath have starkly different Eircodes from each other.
To me, this is obviously a good idea. I realise that sequential or hierarchical codes appeal to some people's aesthetic sense of neatness, but that's hardly a design criteria. There was also some vague talk that sequential or hierarchical codes would allow people to deliver to multiple unknown locations without the aid of technology. I didn't find that convincing, but I suppose we'll find out in the event of a zombie apocalypse.0
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement