National Postcodes to be introduced

Jack180570

Aimead wrote: »

I get what you’re saying, and to be honest I don’t disagree with the core point. It is just that there are two ‘original uses’ involved here. Address validation is only one use, the other is actually finding locations. For the former you definitely have a case, but for the latter (which is an arguably more important use) the current Eircode setup definitely makes things more complicated.
I need some serious convincing to buy this one.

To borrow reasoning from another poster, if pseudo-random digits can perform a given function then so can non-random digits. By contrast non-random digits (eg: geocoding) can do functionality that non-random digits cannot. I don’t see how this simple argument can be in any way assailable, but I’m all hears to see someone try.
Cost is only one issue, the completely lack on interoperability would be the bigger problem imo. Right now anyone could take something like OpenPostcode and have it integrate with their excel sheets, could write up some .Net programs to use it, etc., and all because it is highly interoperable.

What a lot of people in this thread don’t realise (which I suspect is due to them never having worked in the industry) is that you rarely get off-the-shelf software solutions that can do what is needed. Pick any company and you’d likely see unique challenges that mean a certain level of customisation will be needed – and Eircode’s inherent lack of interoperability will a continuing problem.

---

‘Answering’. That word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
Care to substantiate that?
Seriously? You’re seriously claiming that there are no jurisdictions that utilise postcodes that are “increasingly similar for increasingly close properties”???? Like, does the UK postcode not exist? Or the German postcode???

When a claim this ridiculous is made the default position should be contempt. Just saying.
How can this be true? A geocode will always be algorithmically convertible to GPS, which will never be true of any pseudo-random code. Almost all geocodes will have discernible ‘movement’ that correlates with proximity (eg: OpenPostcode & Loc8), which a pseudo-random code can never have.

Trying to claim that such could ever become like Eircode isn’t just an incorrect assertion, it is quite silly to be frank.
You know the whole functionality that geocodes give? Functionality that was discussed at length during the submissions? Functionality that was part of the previous reports made by the postcode committee? That would be a rather obvious reason.
I will take my incivility over your ridiculous contrived fobbing-off any day.

---

How does this actually address the argument that a geocode, which does deal with non-indexed locations, would be better than current Eircode, which doesn’t deal with non-indexed locations and is thus deficient in functionality? Functionality, it must be said, was part of the original argument in favour of having a national postcode. Functionality which is needed to make the claim on the Eircode website that it “enables people and businesses to find every address in Ireland” true.
You’ve jumped on a comment that was part of exchange between myself and another poster, and completely ignored the context and the train of thought that lead to that comment. Not the first time you have done that in this thread either.

The exchange was over the amount of confusion that would be caused by current Eircode and a hypothetical alternative. I made the point that people not understanding the different between a postal address and what they use is a source of confusion in the current Eircode system, particularly for those whose postal office is in another county (and thus their postal address is too). But instead of adding to this particular discussion you instead took it out of context to, it seems, try scoring a cheap debating point. Well done you. And GJG wonders why I’m getting narky.

---

Is that really reason to cripple functionality though? Serious question.

Let’s suppose this is an issue of importance – could it have been solved? The raw address information, irrespective of Eircode, will lead to snobbery anyway even if done behind closed doors in a property office. The only thing you can change is to make it less obvious from looking at the code visually. One idea off the top of my head would be to choose how you incorporate the error checking into the code generation. You’d still be able tell the relative locations of different properties, but the snobbery aspect wouldn’t be as visually obvious to the normal man on the street.

All that said, I think the idea that ‘snobbery’ should ever have been considered when designing a national postcode is a bit crazy.

---

The last time you mentioned this I pointed out that, at least for large areas of the country, it wasn’t true. And similarity has actually proven helpful when trying to find phone numbers in the dead tree directory if I knew of a number that was in the same vicinity.

But your whole argument completely falls apart when you consider that telephone numbers are not used for navigation and thus having them hierarchical would not have provided an advantage. – something that is totally untrue with a postcode, and I say that as someone who has years of experience using, and benefiting from, the NI postcode having an actual logical structure.

And by the way the FTAI, which has complained about Eircode for lacking this specific feature and speak from experience, are hardly the ‘Loc8 lobby’.

---

I’m pretty sure the logistics industry would fall under these. The FTAI have called for accurate maps of the routing keys because it is the only part of Eircode that contains any locational information (and thus the part most useful to their industry, which is a sizeable industry to be fair).

---

Genuinely, thank you for posting that. I don’t think people realise the disparity between the needs of delivery services and how Eircode turned out, and I feel most of that is due to unfamiliarity with that type of business. Really wish there was more people who could post stories like yours to help drive this home.

This little portion needs a bit more highlighting. A lot of people who have proposed technological solutions may have an overly-idealised concept of how deliveries get planned and ultimately made. A few last minute orders can play havoc with a proposed planning, and on-the-ground there simply may not be enough time to give to entering the information into an application and then wait for the results. A last minute order not delivered is custom lost, and being able to visually know which truck, van or delivery route a last minute order should go on is vital – and Eircode is an obstacle to this.

Excellence well thought out, intelligent post based on practical real - life experience which is so lacking in so many other posts of late.

It is unfortunate that even a fraction of the insight and knowledge of this poster wasn't employed when Eircode was designed.

ukoda

Bayberry wrote: »

Are you asking me that question because you can't read English, or because you want to twist what I said and argue against something else? I only ask because I can't see any other reason for your followup.

People like you have excused some of the dumb design decisions in eircode by claiming that people wouldn't stand for their addresses being changed. We've seem Liam O'Sullivan's contribution to the Oireachtas committee being quoted as justification for everything from D adddress routing codes in Dublin on the one hand, to non-location specific routing codes for the rest of the country.

There's no need for your tone.

I'm simply making the point, you seem to be suggesting that people will have no issue changing their address and eircode are using that as an "excuse" for the design, you actually posted that suggestion in reply to a person who was complaining about their address being changed.

Is the irony lost on you?

Victor

Bayberry wrote: »

Are you asking me that question because you can't read English

I need you to tone it down big-time.

Moderator

SPDUB

Sam Russell wrote: »

Portmarnock from Co Dublin to Dublin 13 could have been avoided (or rather blamed on rationalising 'standard' addresses).

Portmarnock mail has been delivered from Dublin 13 for many years .

The only thing that has changed is that people outside Portmarnock now also know that if you have to pick up a package you go to the Dublin 13 office

Sam Russell

SPDUB wrote: »

Portmarnock mail has been delivered from Dublin 13 for many years .

The only thing that has changed is that people outside Portmarnock now also know that if you have to pick up a package you go to the Dublin 13 office

My point is that the reason for the (daft) decisions within Eircode was to retain addresses as they were to avoid 'snobbery' yet there are many examples of these changes that would be seen giving rise to it. There is no logic to the 139 routing codes.

Smaller routing code areas would have been better. Even publishing an accurate map of these areas would be useful (bur secrecy has dogged this project).

Bayberry

ukoda wrote: »

There's no need for your tone.

There should be no need for me to repeatedly correct your twist on my words, just so that you can argue against a point that I didn't make. But here we are.

ukoda wrote:

I'm simply making the point, you seem to be suggesting that people will have no issue changing their address and eircode are using that as an "excuse" for the design, you actually posted that suggestion in reply to a person who was complaining about their address being changed.

Is the irony lost on you?

Let me quote myself yet again:

bayberry wrote:

a lot of the bolloxology in eircode is excused because it had to be that way because people are attached to their addresses and wouldn't stand for any changes being imposed on them!

I said nothing about whether people would or should accept changes in their addresses. I said that Eircode supporters make a big deal of the fact that eircode has to pinpoint individual houses because you can't make rural dwellers use numbers and street names, as changing addresses was a complete no-no from the beginning. Yet the very first introduction that tens of thousands of people got to eircode came on a card that had a different address than the address that they have been using for decades.

There are a whole host of ironies in that - the obvious one of saying one thing but doing another, then there's the very notion that people in Dublin postal districts have a greater "sense of place" than people in Clare, but the greatest is probably the idea that you'd introduce a so-called postcode that would do away with the notion of any geographical markers at all (except in Dublin, where we just live and die by our "sense of place") while the actual Postal Authority starts to insist on addresses that are rendered utterly redundant by this so-called postcode.

Bayberry

Victor wrote: »

I need you to tone it down big-time.

Moderator

I would suggest that you need to stop quoting out of context. Ukoda has repeatedly posted "creative interpretations" of my posts. He might be excused if he has difficulties reading English. If, on the other hand, he is doing it deliberately, you should be moderating his posts, not mine.

Impetus

a65b2cd wrote: »

With 35% to 40% non-unique addresses, around 60% of most large public sector databases should have been eircoded (is this a new verb in the English language . I presume ESB may be the first letter with an Eircode that people will receive one from!

The ESB and most other utilities no longer send bills in the conventional mail service. Notwithstanding the fact that Ireland has no ID card system, and banks and others are being forced to ask original for utility bills and similar to verify addresses. An ID card (unlike a passport) shows the current residential address of the cardholder.

Aimead

ukoda wrote: »

Please, with the greatest of respect, for the love of God, please stop multi-quoting and writing essays that go on and on and on and on

Arguing the merits or otherwise of Eircode requires discussing some detail and some of the issues do get a bit technical. That’s the nature of the beast, and as long as there are plenty of half-truths in need of correcting then I’ll continue trying to point those out with the needed detail. You don’t have to read nor respond to me, but I don’t think your decision to do or not do that should have any bearing on me.

---

Been digging a bit more into the new PlusCodes. I think the use of the plus symbol in PlusCodes for distinguishing when localisation has occurred is genius, and if a cut-down version had been done for Ireland it would be superior to both Loc8 and OpenPostcode. Cool project, but I weep a little since it demonstrates a little og what could have been done with our postcode.

Carawaystick

Impetus wrote: »

The ESB and most other utilities no longer send bills in the conventional mail service. Notwithstanding the fact that Ireland has no ID card system, and banks and others are being forced to ask original for utility bills and similar to verify addresses. An ID card (unlike a passport) shows the current residential address of the cardholder.

If you move, how does your id card know your current address has changed?

My electricity, gas and telecoms utilities all post bills. I just have to find the actual bill in among all the advertising tat that comes with it.

ukoda

Aimead wrote: »

Been digging a bit more into the new PlusCodes. I think the use of the plus symbol in PlusCodes for distinguishing when localisation has occurred is genius, and if a cut-down version had been done for Ireland it would be superior to both Loc8 and OpenPostcode. Cool project, but I weep a little since it demonstrates a little og what could have been done with our postcode.

you know we still have pluscodes? Ireland isn't being left out of googles pluscodes because we have ericode.

And from looking at autoaddreses tweets they are integrating pluscodes into the eircode API, which suggests they can work together and compliment each other, I don't fully understand the extent of this yet

Aimead

ukoda wrote: »

you know we still have pluscodes? Ireland isn't being left out of googles pluscodes because we have ericode.

I have genuinely lost count just how many times this specific canard of “you can still use X” has been posted. How many times does the explanation of why this is a canard have to be posted before it stops being used????

The geocode functionality that comes with OpenPostcode, Loc8, PlusCodes, GPS, MapCodes, etc., etc., etc., was discussed at length during the consultation process. It was discussed why it was a good thing, how it aids interoperability, etc., etc., etc.

A central complaint is that Eircode, due to lacking this functionality, is deficient is terms of functionality and interoperability. The canard above doesn’t address any of this. All it does is emphasise the glaring lack of geocode functionality and lack of interoperability that Eircode suffers from. Why anyone would think this sort of two-liner comment, a comment that is little more than an admission that Eircode doesn’t have this sort of geocode functionality, would make a compelling argument is total beyond me.

And even more irony – the reason AutoAddress can make use of PlusCodes is because it was released as an open source standard, highlighting even more how conducive to interoperability a geocode is.

ukoda

Aimead wrote: »

I have genuinely lost count just how many times this specific canard of “you can still use X” has been posted. How many times does the explanation of why this is a canard have to be posted before it stops being used????

The geocode functionality that comes with OpenPostcode, Loc8, PlusCodes, GPS, MapCodes, etc., etc., etc., was discussed at length during the consultation process. It was discussed why it was a good thing, how it aids interoperability, etc., etc., etc.

A central complaint is that Eircode, due to lacking this functionality, is deficient is terms of functionality and interoperability. The canard above doesn’t address any of this. All it does is emphasise the glaring lack of geocode functionality and lack of interoperability that Eircode suffers from. Why anyone would think this sort of two-liner comment, a comment that is little more than an admission that Eircode doesn’t have this sort of geocode functionality, would make a compelling argument is total beyond me.

And even more irony – the reason AutoAddress can make use of PlusCodes is because it was released as an open source standard, highlighting even more how conducive to interoperability a geocode is.

Ericode isn't a geocode, it wasn't designed to be one.

It is what it is and it is useful for what it was designed to be useful for.

Having more than one of something isn't necessarily a bad thing at all

Aimead

ukoda wrote: »

Ericode isn't a geocode, it wasn't designed to be one.

A mistake that needs to be called out again and again. I note the lack of any argumentation to justify that terrible design decision btw.

---

Venting a little with this one, but had I asked most people a few years ago what a postcode was and asked them to describe such the majority of people would have included locational functionality. Read the submissions and the interim report – almost every party that broached the topic seemed to make the assumption that a postcode had something to do with a code offering locational functionality. Prior to the Capita’s complete upheaval in the design process I doubt I’d have been able to easily find people who thought differently on the issue of postcodes being a locational code.

Now consider this thread. The idea that a postcode has anything to do with providing locational functionality seems like anathema to some judging by their posts. That’s crazy, but there you go.

ukoda

Aimead wrote: »

A mistake that needs to be called out again and again. I note the lack of any argumentation to justify that terrible design decision btw.

---

Venting a little with this one, but had I asked most people a few years ago what a postcode was and asked them to describe such the majority of people would have included locational functionality. Read the submissions and the interim report – almost every party that broached the topic seemed to make the assumption that a postcode had something to do with a code offering locational functionality. Prior to the Capita’s complete upheaval in the design process I doubt I’d have been able to easily find people who thought differently on the issue of postcodes being a locational code.

Now consider this thread. The idea that a postcode has anything to do with providing locational functionality seems like anathema to some judging by their posts. That’s crazy, but there you go.

Personally I have little need for a geocode, I have huge need for a postcode like ericode.

From my point of view, a geocode won't improve anything in my life, the only thing I can think of that I'd use it for would be to let my friends know where to meet me, but then iMessage, whatsapp, Facebook, google maps pin drop and share etc can all do that without me having to deal with codes.

Makes no odds to me what my neighbours code looks like either, why would I care?

Impetus

Impetus wrote: »

The ESB and most other utilities no longer send bills in the conventional mail service. Notwithstanding the fact that Ireland has no ID card system, and banks and others are being forced to ask original for utility bills and similar to verify addresses. An ID card (unlike a passport) shows the current residential address of the cardholder.

Nothing stopping you from printing the PDF file that is emailed to you.

Calina

Deleted User wrote: »

Nothing stopping you from printing the PDF file that is emailed to you.

These are not necessarily accepted as "originals".

Calina

Impetus wrote: »

The ESB and most other utilities no longer send bills in the conventional mail service. Notwithstanding the fact that Ireland has no ID card system, and banks and others are being forced to ask original for utility bills and similar to verify addresses. An ID card (unlike a passport) shows the current residential address of the cardholder.

On the ESB and related, I still get paper bills from 3 utilities.

It won't be long before we have a de facto one. The new cards public services cards have photographs of the bearer and afaik any new claims from SW will require a new card.

I don't think ID cards have to show the current residential address of the cardholder per se although a lot of them probably do.

Calina

ukoda wrote: »

Personally I have little need for a geocode, I have huge need for a postcode like ericode.

No reason why the Irish postal code system couldn't have encoded a little more geographical information than it does.

ukoda wrote: »

From my point of view, a geocode won't improve anything in my life, the only thing I can think of that I'd use it for would be to let my friends know where to meet me, but then iMessage, whatsapp, Facebook, google maps pin drop and share etc can all do that without me having to deal with codes.

Most people, I suspect, would have assumed that smartphones wouldn't really have made any major difference to their life already, sure don't they already have a mobile phone, what would you need a camera on a phone for, etc etc etc.

The point being, just because you cannot imagine a utility for it now, does not mean your life would not be improved by the existence of a postal code which encompassed some form of the features of a geocode. It wasn't necessary for the Irish postal code system to be completely without it.

ukoda wrote: »

Makes no odds to me what my neighbours code looks like either, why would I care?

I don't care what my neighbour's code looks like per se. But there is an argument in favour of better clustering of the code for navigation reasons.

________________________

To be honest, afaics, most of the arguments in favour of the Eircode implementation are "it's what we have, live with it" and "I'm alright, Jack, not problem if there's stuff you could have done with a different design".

SPDUB

Sam Russell wrote: »

My point is that the reason for the (daft) decisions within Eircode was to retain addresses as they were to avoid 'snobbery' yet there are many examples of these changes that would be seen giving rise to it.

Keeping on saying it's a change won't make it a change .

There is no logic to the 139 routing codes.

I'm sure there is some logic to them .You not knowing the logic doesn't make them illogical

oscarBravo

Aimead wrote: »

...had I asked most people a few years ago what a postcode was and asked them to describe such the majority of people would have included locational functionality.

[...]

The idea that a postcode has anything to do with providing locational functionality seems like anathema to some judging by their posts.

You appear to be arguing that, because not every location has an Eircode, that Eircodes don't provide locational functionality. It must take quite the effort of will to ignore the fact that every Eircode precisely describes a location.

Calina

Calina wrote: »

These are not necessarily accepted as "originals".

If someone complained that the document wasn't original, I would insist that they send it to the issuing utility to verify as no paper bill was issued.

Otherwise they lose a customer!

moyners

The number of Eircode approved providers has quietly increased to 11 companies.

https://www.eircode.ie/business/feature

Carawaystick

[Deleted User] wrote: »

If someone complained that the document wasn't original, I would insist that they send it to the issuing utility to verify as no paper bill was issued.

Otherwise they lose a customer!

I hope you're never a customer of social welfare...

Carawaystick

Carawaystick wrote: »

I hope you're never a customer of social welfare...

If I haven’t received a paper copy then I can't provide a paper copy!

Carawaystick

[Deleted User] wrote: »

If I haven’t received a paper copy then I can't provide a paper copy!

Then you will probably not be able to receive your insurance payments. A win for us.

Jack180570

ukoda wrote: »

Ericode isn't a geocode, it wasn't designed to be one.

It is what it is and it is useful for what it was designed to be useful for.

Having more than one of something isn't necessarily a bad thing at all

Eircode is a horse designed by committee = a camel..

Carawaystick

Carawaystick wrote: »

Then you will probably not be able to receive your insurance payments. A win for us.

the bottom line is that as we're trending towards a "paperless" world, then the insurance companies are going to have to tell their minions to get off their bureaucratic haunches and accept the paperless versions.

moyners

We may finally get a look at an official map of the routing code areas:

https://twitter.com/autoaddress/status/634763165717385218

dr.fuzzenstein

[Deleted User] wrote: »

the bottom line is that as we're trending towards a "paperless" world, then the insurance companies are going to have to tell their minions to get off their bureaucratic haunches and accept the paperless versions.

That would be expecting insurance companies to display common sense and use their brains.