National Postcodes to be introduced

Calina

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.

This issue is not linked purely to insurance companies.

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

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

Calina wrote: »

This issue is not linked purely to insurance companies.

true, quote amended.

54and56

moyners wrote: »

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

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

What are routing polygons???

ukoda

Je_suis_Jean wrote: »

What are routing polygons???

Basically an outline of the area a code covers on a map, so the boundary outline of each of the 139 routing keys.

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.

Well it has been argued here several times why it's a bad idea to use a geocode

The main reason: they are just points on a map that don't necessarily relate to anything, there could be multiple codes for one property causing confusion and not allowing address validation, then people have argued you could have 1 "official" code per property that's tied to a database for address validation, then people argue that this would cause confusion and we'd have offical and non offical postcodes, which is kinda what we do have now with ericode (official) and all others (non official)

Just because you don't like or agree with a point of view, doesn't mean it doesn't exist or hasn't been debated.

Jack180570

ukoda wrote: »

Well it has been argued here several times why it's a bad idea to use a geocode

The main reason: they are just points on a map that don't necessarily relate to anything, there could be multiple codes for one property causing confusion and not allowing address validation, then people have argued you could have 1 "official" code per property that's tied to a database for address validation, then people argue that this would cause confusion and we'd have offical and non offical postcodes, which is kinda what we do have now with ericode (official) and all others (non official)

Just because you don't like or agree with a point of view, doesn't mean it doesn't exist or hasn't been debated.

Ukoda, your point of view as expressed above is illogical and fails as a reason why Eircode was chosen over Loc8 Code.

marmurr1916

Jack180570 wrote: »

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

A camel is a far more robust animal than a horse. Try crossing the Sahara on a horse...

marmurr1916

marmurr1916 wrote: »

A camel is a far more robust animal than a horse. Try crossing the Sahara on a horse...

True, but try to win the Grand National on one! :P

Carawaystick

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.

Or the bureaucrats in Social welfare could just not pay out... saves them money.

Carawaystick

Carawaystick wrote: »

Or the bureaucrats in Social welfare could just not pay out... saves them money.

Well, when the minions are faced with an angry TD/Manager (embarrassed by the publicity) then they usually get off their bureaucratic haunches. They also get very pissed off so be sure to have everything else perfect!

Unfortunately, I've worked with people like this in the past and common sense goes out of the window if there is a rule (that requires updating) to follow. I've also worked with people who are "stiffed" if there isn't a process to follow, they insist that their manager provides a procedure to follow, rather than suggest a process and check that it is OK.
Of course, these are the type of people who "never make mistakes!"

marmurr1916

Deleted User wrote: »

True, but try to win the Grand National on one! :P

Try winning the Grand National on a horse - most of the fecking things either fall down or dump their riders.

marmurr1916

Quick question for fans of UK postcodes, especially those who think that you can see just by looking at them where they are roughly in relation to one another without the need to look up any databases or even consult a map:

which of these postcodes is closer by road to DL13 4HL?

Is it DL13 3NL or DH8 0AA?

Remember, no looking up databases, no checking maps. All you've got to go on is the similarity (or otherwise) between the postcodes.

And another one:

which is closer to DH6? DH1 or DH8?

plodder

marmurr1916 wrote: »

Quick question for fans of UK postcodes, especially those who think that you can see just by looking at them where they are roughly in relation to one another without the need to look up any databases or even consult a map:

which of these postcodes is closer by road to DL13 4HL?

Is it DL13 3NL or DH8 0AA?

Remember, no looking up databases, no checking maps. All you've got to go on is the similarity (or otherwise) between the postcodes.

And another one:

which is closer to DH6? DH1 or DH8?

I'm not sure what the point of the question is. Obviously, you can't work it out just by looking at it, for 100% of postcode areas. What's important is the fact that you can work it out without having to license any product from the UK post office.

For many kinds of small business, they would just have a map on the wall. And given that the data is free, probably means there is a lot of free software out there which does it as well.

Incidentally, I notice that Autoaddress tweeted the other day, that delivery companies are using the small area codes, from the Eircode database, for organising deliveries efficiently. That kind of knocks the idea that small areas aren't useful for organising deliveries.

TheChizler

plodder wrote: »

That kind of knocks the idea that small areas aren't useful for organising deliveries.

Of course they are useful, that's not enough enough of a reason alone to incorporate them into the actual code though.

Aimead

oscarBravo wrote: »

You appear to be arguing that, because not every location has an Eircode, that Eircodes don't provide locational functionality.

Where I come from we call this a strawman. You know full the argument being made, as it has been made countless times (and not just by myself either). So why completely ignore all that and go for this sort of blatant strawman???

Hell, the post itself was a direct response intended to challenge the notion that Eircode shouldn’t have been designed as a geocode. Even if you couldn’t be bothered to read back or half-remember what has been said previously, the snippet that was being responded to showed the context that locational code referred to. Why ignore that sort of context???

Your last few posts to me have been nothing but cheap strawmen like the above. What’s the point of doing that?

---

ukoda wrote: »

Well it has been argued here several times why it's a bad idea to use a geocode

I’m pretty sure I’ve covered ever ‘reason’ that has been given. Let’s see how your latest fare:

they are just points on a map that don't necessarily relate to anything
The exact same argument applies to Eircode. You do know that, after consulting the database, you are given GPS coordinates for doing the navigation? Which is a point on a map after all….

there could be multiple codes for one property causing confusion and not allowing address validation
Easily solvable by using non-zero z-axis values for validating against.

…then people argue that this would cause confusion and we'd have offical and non offical postcodes, which is kinda what we do have now with ericode (official) and all others (non official)
You’re conflating two different functions – namely navigation and validation.

The navigation would still be based on the national postcode – that postcode would be a State-approved standard. Loc8, OpenPostcode, PlusCodes, etc. are not State-approved and thus the comparison totally fails.

The validation would be done against codes in the reserved z-axis range. This would be the one mailed to your house, and would also be discoverable on the website in exactly the same way you can look up your Eircode today.

I don’t see how the above is any more confusing than current Eircode with Shannon Airport being in Limerick – it just needs to be explained to people and time allowed for getting familiar with it. The difference is that, in my proposed scenario, the code offers a wealth of functionality that comes with being a geocode.

Just because you don't like or agree with a point of view, doesn't mean it doesn't exist or hasn't been debated.

If you could direct me to the document, preferably from the Eircode designers, explaining why a geocode wasn’t used I’d be glad to take a look at it. Because I cannot find where this was discussed during the consultation or with stakeholders (certainly not with the transport and logistics industry).

---

marmurr1916 wrote: »

which of these postcodes is closer by road to DL13 4HL?

Is it DL13 3NL or DH8 0AA?

As the crow flies DL13 is closer. I’d have to whip out my handmap at this point to see which road was shorter.

Not sure of your point since the key information, if you were making a delivery, is that you know you’d be doing DH8 0AA to DL13 3NL to DL13 4HL or its reverse. You can’t do that bit with Eircode.

And another one:

which is closer to DH6? DH1 or DH8?

I know, but I admit only know because I do this sort of shoite for a living. Durham has a central code (DH1) and the rest circumnavigate it starting with the north and counting clockwise. There is a logic to it.

I don’t think you’ve realised that you’ve actually undercut your own point here. The UK postcode has plenty of quirks and historical oddities (believe me, I know). And yet, as poorly designed as it was when it comes to geocoding, it still far outperforms Eircode on this sort of visual-only navigation.

---

TheChizler wrote: »

…. that's not enough enough of a reason alone to incorporate them into the actual code though.

Why not? It greatly improves the functionality and I can’t see any downside. Facilitating deliveries was a large part of the argument to have a postcode in the first place, so if it was a good enough reason to want a postcode surely it is a good enough reason for the actual code to have included it…??

plodder

TheChizler wrote: »

Of course they are useful,

That's progress I suppose. When the idea was first mooted, people said - "oh they were designed by the CSO for statistics, not for organising deliveries. And they said, look at these two small areas in some corner of the country, organising by small area doesn't work here. So, it mustn't work anywhere ...

oscarBravo

plodder wrote: »

That's progress I suppose. When the idea was first mooted, people said - "oh they were designed by the CSO for statistics, not for organising deliveries. And they said, look at these two small areas in some corner of the country, organising by small area doesn't work here. So, it mustn't work anywhere ...

I don't recall that objection. I do recall pointing out that small area boundaries get redefined, so including them in the code itself would require changing postcodes, whereas having them referenced in a database only requires updating database records.

marmurr1916

plodder wrote: »

I'm not sure what the point of the question is. Obviously, you can't work it out just by looking at it, for 100% of postcode areas. What's important is the fact that you can work it out without having to license any product from the UK post office.

So it's not possible to tell which addresses are closer to each other just by knowing their UK postcodes (and not looking at them on a map) even though they're hierarchical and structured? Thanks for clarifying, that's all I wanted to demonstrate.

Originally Posted by Aimead View Post
I’m much more at home with chan sites and other places where, shall we say, moderation is done with a lighter hand. Boards.ie isn’t the typical place I’d post on, and I’ve been putting effort into holding back the sort of invective that I’d be free to post elsewhere.

But, in this case, I’m going to make a bit of an exception and call you out for peddling a wilful and disingenuous strawman (not the first one either).

Suppose someone gave you the following (making these up):
T23 UUUU
T23 VVVV
T23 WWWW
T23 XXXX
T23 YYYY
T23 ZZZZ

You wouldn’t know where they where with reference to each. Now suppose someone had given me the following:
BT56 UUU
BT56 VVV
BT56 WWW
BT56 XXX
BT56 YYY
BT56 ZZZ

I would now where they where with reference to each other. On visual inspection you can obtain useful information from the postcode that you do not obtain from Eircode. This point isn’t new and has been made multiple times in this thread. So why are you being deliberately disingenuous when the point being made is clear? You know that the routing boundaries are currently not known, and you know that it isn’t possible to tell where within a boundary a given Eircode is on visual inspection. To borrow your own phrase, isn’t a bit pathetic that an old code from the 60’s outperforms the supposedly modern Eircode in this scenario?

To put it simply – if you really believe in the veracity of your defence of Eircode, then why do you continually play dumb as you have done so above?

plodder wrote: »

What's important is the fact that you can work it out without having to license any product from the UK post office.

Just as you can work it out with eircodes without having to buy any product from any postal service. Remember the add-on for Chrome that allows you to bypass the 15 per day look-up limit? Once you know the eircodes you can find the distances and routes between eircode locations with Google Maps.

As the crow flies DL13 is closer. I’d have to whip out my handmap at this point to see which road was shorter.

Which DL13? There are two DL13 postcodes in the question. You're saying that the two DL13 postcodes are closer to each other as the crow flies than either is to the DH8 postcode? I'm not so sure about that either, but even if they are I don't think there are very many "as the crow flies" delivery services.

And you're not allowed to look at the map, remember?

Not sure of your point since the key information, if you were making a delivery, is that you know you’d be doing DH8 0AA to DL13 3NL to DL13 4HL or its reverse. You can’t do that bit with Eircode.

Why would you necessarily be doing DH8 0AA to the other postcodes? That's based on a pretty huge assumption that your starting point is either DH8 0AA or closest to DH8 0AA.

What if your business was in DL13 4HL and you had two deliveries to make, one to DL13 3NL and one to DH8 0AA but you've only got a limited amount of fuel that day and you want to know which of the two postcodes (either DL13 3NL or DH8 0AA) is the shortest drive away from you so you can conserve your fuel. Can you figure that out without reference to a map?

and another one:

which is closer to DH6? DH1 or DH8?

I know, but I admit only know because I do this sort of shoite for a living. Durham has a central code (DH1) and the rest circumnavigate it starting with the north and counting clockwise. There is a logic to it.

Just as there's a logic to the D eircodes (odd numbered ones north of Liffey, even numbered ones south of Liffey). Once you know that, you're grand. But if you don't already know that DH1 is the centre of the DH postcode area and that the other areas spiral out from it in that particular fashion, how do you know whether DH8 is closer to DH6 or DH1? Just by looking at the postcodes without reference to a map? Obviously you can't. Neither can you tell just by looking at KW postcodes (assuming you're not already familiar with them) whether you're going to need a ferry or not.

If you weren't familiar with AB postcodes would you be able to guess that AB10 and AB11 are the most central areas of Aberdeen city, and that AB25 is only a few hundred metres to the north of the city centre?

Or would you make the "logical" assumption that AB1, AB2 etc are the most central postcode areas and that AB10 and other double-digit AB postcode areas are likely to be suburbs of Aberdeen or even rural areas far from the city, with AB25 likely to be further out from the city centre than AB14 (even though in reality AB25 is just to the north of the city centre and AB14 is miles out from the city centre)? How would you know that just from looking at the postcodes themselves? Would you be able to tell that AB25 is further away from AB32 than AB14 is from AB32 just from looking at the postcodes themselves?

If you weren't already familiar with the KW postcode area would you realise just from the postcodes that most of the KW postcodes are actually on the Scottish mainland and that only a minority actually cover the Orkney islands? And if you had only partial familiarity with the KW postcode area would you make the assumption that since KW stands for Kirkwall, the largest town on the Orkney islands, that KW1 is going to cover Kirkwall town? And would you make the assumption that low-numbered KW postcode locations (KW2, KW3 etc) are more likely to be on the islands closer to Kirkwall rather than in the KW mainland areas? If you did, you'd be wrong about these assumptions.

You're forgiving the "quirks and historical oddities" of the UK postcode system because you're already familiar with it.

I don't think a system in which you can't figure out whether a DL17 4XX postcode is closer or further to a DL17 3XX postcode than a DH8 0XX postcode without looking up a road map, a system in which you can't figure out whether a KW postcode is on an island or on the mainland (fairly crucial information to have) without prior knowledge of the KW postcode area or without looking up a map, or whether an AB postcode is in or close to the centre of Aberdeen or many miles from the centre without prior knowledge of the AB postcode area or without looking up a map "outperforms" any other postcode system. In both cases, UK postcodes or eircodes, you have to either look up a map or have prior knowledge.

I don’t think you’ve realised that you’ve actually undercut your own point here. The UK postcode has plenty of quirks and historical oddities (believe me, I know). And yet, as poorly designed as it was when it comes to geocoding, it still far outperforms Eircode on this sort of visual-only navigation.

So you're claiming that it's easier to figure out whether DH8 is closer to DH1 or DH6 than it is to figure out whether D24 is closer to D22 just by looking at the postcodes themselves ("visual-only navigation") with no other source of information and with no prior knowledge of the DH postcode areas or D routing key areas?

ukoda

Aimead wrote: »

Where I come from we call this a strawman. You know full the argument being made, as it has been made countless times (and not just by myself either). So why completely ignore all that and go for this sort of blatant strawman???

Hell, the post itself was a direct response intended to challenge the notion that Eircode shouldn’t have been designed as a geocode. Even if you couldn’t be bothered to read back or half-remember what has been said previously, the snippet that was being responded to showed the context that locational code referred to. Why ignore that sort of context???

Your last few posts to me have been nothing but cheap strawmen like the above. What’s the point of doing that?

---

I’m pretty sure I’ve covered ever ‘reason’ that has been given. Let’s see how your latest fare:

they are just points on a map that don't necessarily relate to anything
The exact same argument applies to Eircode. You do know that, after consulting the database, you are given GPS coordinates for doing the navigation? Which is a point on a map after all….

there could be multiple codes for one property causing confusion and not allowing address validation
Easily solvable by using non-zero z-axis values for validating against.

…then people argue that this would cause confusion and we'd have offical and non offical postcodes, which is kinda what we do have now with ericode (official) and all others (non official)
You’re conflating two different functions – namely navigation and validation.

The navigation would still be based on the national postcode – that postcode would be a State-approved standard. Loc8, OpenPostcode, PlusCodes, etc. are not State-approved and thus the comparison totally fails.

The validation would be done against codes in the reserved z-axis range. This would be the one mailed to your house, and would also be discoverable on the website in exactly the same way you can look up your Eircode today.

I don’t see how the above is any more confusing than current Eircode with Shannon Airport being in Limerick – it just needs to be explained to people and time allowed for getting familiar with it. The difference is that, in my proposed scenario, the code offers a wealth of functionality that comes with being a geocode.

If you could direct me to the document, preferably from the Eircode designers, explaining why a geocode wasn’t used I’d be glad to take a look at it. Because I cannot find where this was discussed during the consultation or with stakeholders (certainly not with the transport and logistics industry).

---

As the crow flies DL13 is closer. I’d have to whip out my handmap at this point to see which road was shorter.

Not sure of your point since the key information, if you were making a delivery, is that you know you’d be doing DH8 0AA to DL13 3NL to DL13 4HL or its reverse. You can’t do that bit with Eircode.

I know, but I admit only know because I do this sort of shoite for a living. Durham has a central code (DH1) and the rest circumnavigate it starting with the north and counting clockwise. There is a logic to it.

I don’t think you’ve realised that you’ve actually undercut your own point here. The UK postcode has plenty of quirks and historical oddities (believe me, I know). And yet, as poorly designed as it was when it comes to geocoding, it still far outperforms Eircode on this sort of visual-only navigation.

---

Why not? It greatly improves the functionality and I can’t see any downside. Facilitating deliveries was a large part of the argument to have a postcode in the first place, so if it was a good enough reason to want a postcode surely it is a good enough reason for the actual code to have included it…??

Just FYI, but everything you type is your opinion, everything I type is my opinion, we are allowed to disagree, just because you type it here doesn't make it a fact, it's still merely your opinion and you are not an authority to overrule anyone else's opinion if it defers from yours.

Aimead

ukoda wrote: »

Just FYI, but everything you type is your opinion, everything I type is my opinion, we are allowed to disagree, just because you type it here doesn't make it a fact, it's still merely your opinion and you are not an authority to overrule anyone else's opinion if it defers from yours.

Hand on heart here, but the last time someone uttered this line to me was when I was at a meeting of the Flat Earth Society in Lancaster. Just sayin’.

oscarBravo

Aimead wrote: »

You know full the argument being made, as it has been made countless times (and not just by myself either). So why completely ignore all that...?

Because the argument is being made dishonestly.

You seem to feel that it's OK to say things that are untrue because others ought to know by now that you actually meant something other than what you said. Worse still, you seem to feel it's OK to accuse others of committing a logical fallacy by calling you out for saying things that are untrue.

The clear implication of your post to which I was replying is that Eircodes don't provide locational functionality. They do, I called you on it, and you're getting shirty with me for calling you on it.

I get calls at work from customers saying "the Internet isn't working". I check their connection; it's fine. When I call them back, it turns out that what they meant was that YouTube buffers sometimes when there are a dozen torrents downloading at the same time.

Now, as far as they're concerned, that's what they meant - but it's not what they said, which means they said something that's not true.

Your last few posts to me have been nothing but cheap strawmen like the above. What’s the point of doing that?

Cheap strawmen? Let's see...

I don’t see how the above is any more confusing than current Eircode with Shannon Airport being in Limerick…

Shannon Airport isn't in Limerick. Everyone knows Shannon Airport isn't in Limerick. It doesn't matter how many times people who are pissed off with Eircodes claim that Shannon Airport is in Limerick; it's not in Limerick.

If you want to have a serious discussion on the topic, stop saying things that aren't true, and stop getting shirty with people who point out the things you're saying that aren't true. If your objections are valid, they don't need hyperbole to support them.

ukoda

Aimead wrote: »

Hand on heart here, but the last time someone uttered this line to me was when I was at a meeting of the Flat Earth Society in Lancaster. Just sayin’.

Hmmm, well you seem to be of the "my way or the highway" mind set.... reminiscent of dictatorships!

marmurr1916

Aimead wrote: »

Hand on heart here, but the last time someone uttered this line to me was when I was at a meeting of the Flat Earth Society in Lancaster. Just sayin’.

You're a member of the Flat Earth Society? You're from Lancaster?

Sam Russell

oscarBravo wrote: »

Shannon Airport isn't in Limerick. Everyone knows Shannon Airport isn't in Limerick. It doesn't matter how many times people who are pissed off with Eircodes claim that Shannon Airport is in Limerick; it's not in Limerick.

So why do Eircode say it is?

marmurr1916

Sam Russell wrote: »

So why do Eircode say it is?

They don't. The postal address includes the word Limerick. The geographical location of Shannon Airport is in Co. Clare. Can you understand the difference between a postal address and a geographical location?

If you can, you should be able to understand that Shannon Airport is in Co. Clare even though its postal address contains the word Limerick.

It's a bit like trying to claim that because Newry postcodes contain the letters BT that Royal Mail are saying that Newry is in Belfast.

Sam Russell

marmurr1916 wrote: »

They don't. The postal address includes the word Limerick. The geographical location of Shannon Airport is in Co. Clare. Can you understand the difference between a postal address and a geographical location?

If you can, you should be able to understand that Shannon Airport is in Co. Clare even though its postal address contains the word Limerick.

It's a bit like trying to claim that because Newry postcodes contain the letters BT that Royal Mail are saying that Newry is in Belfast.

All NI post codes include BT as part of their code.

If postal codes do not equate to geographical locations, why was it so important for Eircode to maintain the Dublin postal districts? (Except for Portmarnock and a few other places)

Why was it important to have huge routing codes that are not contiguous?

ukoda

Sam Russell wrote: »

All NI post codes include BT as part of their code.

If postal codes do not equate to geographical locations, why was it so important for Eircode to maintain the Dublin postal districts? (Except for Portmarnock and a few other places)

Why was it important to have huge routing codes that are not contiguous?

So according to the NI postcode, everything is in Belfast.

They maintained the D postcodes because they are already engrained in day to day stuff and people's memories.

marmurr1916

Sam Russell wrote: »

All NI post codes include BT as part of their code.

[sarcasm]Really? I never knew that[/sarcasm]

Which kind of disproves arguments made previously in this thread (by other posters IIRC) that UK postcodes are linked to meaningful geographical locations.

I don't think a postcode system that uses an abbreviation of one city (Belfast) for an entire region of the UK quite meets that standard, do you?

I'm pretty sure that people in Co. Fermanagh, for example, don't find any particularly meaningful link between the letters BT and the county of Fermanagh. Unless they're unique among the inhabitants of the island of Ireland in not having any sentimental attachment to their county. Same goes for people from any of the other counties in the north.

Sam Russell wrote: »

If postal codes do not equate to geographical locations, why was it so important for Eircode to maintain the Dublin postal districts? (Except for Portmarnock and a few other places)

Because the idea of referring to Dublin 4 etc as D4 had already become ingrained as habit in many people. Many postal addresses, with or without eircodes, don't necessarily refer to geographical locations. Many others (probably most of them) do. Just because many postal addresses aren't linked to geographical locations doesn't mean that none are. Some are, some aren't. Is that hard to understand? :rolleyes:

Sam Russell wrote: »

Why was it important to have huge routing codes that are not contiguous?

If, apart from most of Dublin, there's no link between the letters used as part of routing keys and geographical areas what difference does it make whether routing key areas are contiguous or not?

SPDUB

Sam Russell wrote: »

why was it so important for Eircode to maintain the Dublin postal districts? (Except for Portmarnock and a few other places)

How many times do you have to be told that they retained the Dublin postal districts including Portmarnock

You keep stating that they didn't but it's no more true this time than the first time you said it.

Sam Russell

SPDUB wrote: »

How many times do you have to be told that they retained the Dublin postal districts including Portmarnock

You keep stating that they didn't but it's no more true this time than the first time you said it.

But Portmarnock was not in a Dublin postcode but it is now. I would imagine it is not the only place to move about.