Government introduces Postcodes in Ireland..?

garydubh

Yoda wrote: »

Not really. K15 and K1S are visually ambiguous. So would K03 and KO3 be. These are not trivial points in systems design. Other alphanumeric coding systems address the problem in various ways. You just claim that there is "no ambiguity". Part of being a standardizer involves considering and accepting constructive criticism, rather than just gainsaying those who offer it.

Yoda - words like "mis-sortation" or even "sortation" or "standardizer" or even "Standardiser" are not in popular use on this side of the Atlantic. Language is not really a technology it is a means of communication and therefore it is important that words used are popularly understood. However, I am not an expert in these matters - it seems that you probably are so I bow to your superior knowledge on the English language - Hibernian dialect!

Getting back to PON Codes then....

I have already explained that ambiguity does not exist in the K15 and K1S example you have used - 4 reasons
1. Most people can visually differentiate between 5 and S in most cases in the same way that they can differentiate between 1 and 7 !!!!!
2. If people are writing any code including a Prize Bond, Bank A/C or Sort Code, Cert No,. or any reference number, in all cases they understand that if they make a mistake it with will compromise the outcome. Writing in capitals - as the code is designed - helps with this point in the same way as is done in the UK and NI.

However, we cannot design completely for the fact that no matter what people write they may well make a mistake - nothing we can do about that except emphasise the result and minimise the occasions that they have to write and build in measures as mentioned in reason 4 below.

As for people being able to read their own handwriting ... I think people will now understand, given your profession and your involvement with a another proposal for post code development, that your first example referring to being "unable to read your own hand writing" was, without doubt, deliberately contrived for the purpose of generating an argument against PON Codes on here. ("gainsaying" and "dismissal" you said!!!!!!!!)

3. As explained, PON codes can include the use of a county reference as a gross error check and your statement that most sorting systems do not read the full address is not a valid counter argument! Furthermore, with a county code before the PON code, it does not have to and anyhow technology can be programmed to do anything necessary.

Taking Antoin's angle on this - where items are hand sorted - the county will be visually identified first.

Also your own example of Dublin V Dubai - I am presuming this is a baggage handling issue which is not relevant here as the item is not handled in the same way as mail or parcels - can we stick to the point please!

4. There are many technological solutions to possible human error caused problems - most implemented in the form of an error checking routines including gross error checks!

As for your latest example - sorry to undermine your argument once again but in your latest example - K03 v KO3 - PON Codes do not use the letter "O" - so on your third attemp at this point your argument is still not valid!

You will note that I have opened PON Codes up to full and detailed debate on here and have tried to deal in depth with all issues raised.... so if you have valid points please feel free to raise them and I can assure you that if they have not been already taken into account they will! You are also welcome to contact me privately to offer advise if you wish.......

Thanks for your input

garydubh

brim4brim wrote: »

This is the biggest plus of PON codes for me. It actually solves the problem I think we need to solve and is not as expensive as a database solution especially in the long run especially for Satnav manufacturers.

Thanks brim4brim - spoken like someone who can see the pratical advantages and is not confined by a traditional postcode and delivering mail perspective......

goudystout

Yoda does not seem to like Goudy Stout - what do you think - http://www.fontfinder.ws/14134/Goudy-Stout-CS.html ?

Sponge Bob

my Yahoo argument is that geocoding your location is much more accurate when you use the vastly superior yahoo maps , it is very hit and miss in Google maps and Google earth .

In fact I could only get the main square AA1 for my location that way and it took bloody ages to get the 00AA bit afterwards .

Geocodes are of no use if the end users cannot easily find out what they are . Therefore an accurate fast map based zooming and recentring search is vital and that is not present on the postcodes.ie site as long as you use Google Maps .

Furthermore you obscure the second key fact . That is that Yahoo ALSO has a much better searchable database of Irish Placenames .

Yahoo should be the default , not Google .

Even Microsoft Live and Map24.de are better than Google

Read my 2 DIY geocoding posts in the first page of this thread here

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055427255

garydubh

Sponge Bob wrote: »

Furthermore you obscure the second key fact . That is that Yahoo ALSO has a much better searchable database of Irish Placenames .

Sponge Bob - I agree that anything using Navteq mapping is currently better - that includes Mapquest, Yahoo, Map24 etc etc and in terms of SatNav's that is Garmin also...

Currently, using a solution in the final release that uses Navteq mapping is my own personal preference. There is no obscuring going on - Google Maps was chosen for Beta Testing as people are most familiar with it and it was the easiest to implement - no other reason. For the reasons you suggest we also have supported and gave instructions in the use of Yahoo maps as I said earelier - but believe me doing what we wanted with Yahoo maps was not as straight forward - but all is changing!

There is a lot about the website that will be improved in the final realease - hey we are not a big multinational or Government backed initiative - we are a small GPS company using our own meagre resources to implement what many think is a good idea and all because a Government solution is just not happening or may not be satisfatory if it did

A lot will change in the final release.............

garydubh

goudystout wrote: »

Yoda does not seem to like Goudy Stout - what do you think - http://www.fontfinder.ws/14134/Goudy-Stout-CS.html ?

both ostentatious alcohol and obesity come to mind - don't know why

Yoda

garydubh wrote: »

Yoda - words like "mis-sortation" or even "sortation" or "standardizer" or even "Standardiser" are not in popular use on this side of the Atlantic.

I've lived on this side of the Atlantic since 1989. "Sortation" is a perfectly normal word in the context of the kind of provision of service which place-codes are intended to support. "Mis-sortation" means "getting something sent to the wrong place because it was sorted incorrectly". This activity is a standardization activity. As such it requires a certain technical rigour.

Language is not really a technology it is a means of communication and therefore it is important that words used are popularly understood. However, I am not an expert in these matters - it seems that you probably are so I bow to your superior knowledge on the English language - Hibernian dialect!

"Sortation" and "standardizer" are not dialect words, though the former is technical jargon.

Getting back to PON Codes then....

I have already explained that ambiguity does not exist in the K15 and K1S example you have used - 4 reasons

You have not "explained" anything. You have gainsaid. And you don't show much sign of paying attention to the criticism. You've just retreated into defensiveness. It's true, I don't like alphanumeric schemes. There are good reasons they aren't used more than they are. But there are ways of designing an alphanumeric scheme that avoids certain ambiguities. Your scheme doesn't avoid them. It should.

1. Most people can visually differentiate between 5 and S in most cases in the same way that they can differentiate between 1 and 7 !!!!!

Increasing the number of exclamation points does not strengthen your argument. People can differentiate between 5 an S in context. Machines can, too. Your scheme, however, allows 5 and S in the same context, so a machine certainly will not be able to distinguish them. When I write quickly, 5 and S are indistinguishable. A machine will not be able to distinguish them.

2. If people are writing any code including a Prize Bond, Bank A/C or Sort Code, Cert No,. or any reference number, in all cases they understand that if they make a mistake it with will compromise the outcome.

Prize bond identifiers have an alphanumeric componant, but are not used for automatic sortation. Bank accounts and sort codes are numeric and therefore irrelevant here, and are not used for automatic sortation of the kind we are discussing.

Writing in capitals - as the code is designed - helps with this point in the same way as is done in the UK and NI.

It sounds to me as though you have not entirely understood the structure of UK alphanumeric post codes.

However, we cannot design completely for the fact that no matter what people write they may well make a mistake - nothing we can do about that except emphasise the result and minimise the occasions that they have to write and build in measures as mentioned in reason 4 below.

Incorrect. One can design a system that avoids the problem of 5 and S completely. It is in fact simple to do this.

As for people being able to read their own handwriting ... I think people will now understand, given your profession and your involvement with a another proposal for post code development, that your first example referring to being "unable to read your own hand writing" was, without doubt, deliberately contrived for the purpose of generating an argument against PON Codes on here. ("gainsaying" and "dismissal" you said!!!!!!!!)

This isn't true. I wrote down the PON code on a sheet of paper last night. It's a 7-element alphanumeric code. I cannot, in fact, tell whether I wrote a 5 or an S. I can scan it in and show you if you want. I did not "concoct" this example. (In fact, my "error" in not knowing that "J35" was in the sea demonstrates this.) I have been active in this area since 2002. I want Ireland to have a robust, accurate, and user-friendly system to assist in identification of places.

3. As explained, PON codes can include the use of a county reference as a gross error check and your statement that most sorting systems do not read the full address is not a valid counter argument!

I did not state anything about what "most" sortation systems do or do not do. There is, however, no guarantee that every system will do so, and a head-in-the-sand attitude to automatic sortation is not one to take.

Furthermore, with a county code before the PON code, it does not have to and anyhow technology can be programmed to do anything necessary.

So a hard-to-remember 7-element alphanumeric code isn't enough? You'll need an additional two elements to disambiguate? This should take you back to the drawing board. (I'm not denigrating your efforts. Your website software is fun. It's impressive. But you have overlooked a number of important considerations.)

4. There are many technological solutions to possible human error caused problems - most implemented in the form of an error checking routines including gross error checks!

Your scheme has ambiguity built-in. That's a fault.

As for your latest example - sorry to undermine your argument once again but in your latest example - K03 v KO3 - PON Codes do not use the letter "O" - so on your third attemp at this point your argument is still not valid!

I'm not sure "valid" means what you think it does. I really think you haven't tried to work out what I have been saying. If PON codes do not use the letter "O", then splendid; the PON codes avoid the ambiguity of 0 and O.

You will note that I have opened PON Codes up to full and detailed debate on here and have tried to deal in depth with all issues raised.... so if you have valid points please feel free to raise them and I can assure you that if they have not been already taken into account they will! You are also welcome to contact me privately to offer advise if you wish.......

I do have valid points and have from the beginning. Put aside the defensiveness and do some study and reflection.

Thanks for your input

You're very welcome.

Sponge Bob

I suggest you copy and paste my instructions in that thread into a HOW do I find my exact PON postcode

garydubh

Yoda,

looks like we are not going to agree on this - we are coming at this from two different perspectives - one technological and the other character sets.

But I do appreciate the time you are allocating to this - perhaps we should meet up?

Thanks

Yoda

What are you talking about? Character sets? I did not mention character sets. The only character set in question here is ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ0123456789. Having said that, it is the use you are making of that character set which is part of the problem.

But all I can say at this point is that if you do not care to read and study what I said above, and try to understand it, then your scheme will retain a significant technical flaw.

garydubh

Yoda wrote: »

all I can say at this point is that if you do not care to read and study what I said above, and try to understand it, then your scheme will retain a significant technical flaw.

Yoda - did try and diffuse this discussion with my last post.......

thebman

Yoda wrote: »

What are you talking about? Character sets? I did not mention character sets. The only character set in question here is ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ0123456789. Having said that, it is the use you are making of that character set which is part of the problem.

But all I can say at this point is that if you do not care to read and study what I said above, and try to understand it, then your scheme will retain a significant technical flaw.

Well is it actually possible to do it with a smaller character set?

That would be the first thing to work out. If you need that number of characters or not. I'm sure you need many possible combinations to avoid having a database due to the size of the island so I don't know if it would be possible to do it with 0-9 or A-Z and Gary had a post regarding how easy the code is to remember earlier in the thread. I can't remember what it was but I think it basically said alphanumeric codes are easier for people to remember than pure digits and with only letters, you may end up spelling words and nobody wants to live in BINBAGS which I agree with

Maybe the alphabet for it (better word than characterset?) needs to be examined but not sure if a better system could be implemented.

We have issues with people writing addresses as is so no matter what the system, people will find a way to break it (damn them).

I'm of mixed feelings on the 5/S issue. I think they it is possible to keep them sufficiently different when writing so a system could differentiate between them. I've used OCR on documents in work when we get pictures of news ads that clients want to put on our site and it gets the characters right with the freebie version in word 2007 so a proper industry standard OCR could probably do a very good job on differentiating between the two as long as people don't actually write their 5's as S's in which case you can't do anything to stop them messing it up.

I don't think its that big an issue as long as people make the effort to differentiate the two. Same way they make the effort to write their address clearly to ensure it reaches its destination at the moment.

In print, 5 and S are easily distinguishable I think

antoinolachtnai

It's not just 5 and S. It's B and 8. It's T and Y. It's C and G. It's Q and O/0; b and 6; the list goes on. Normally this is no problem in prose, because the context let's you guess what the unlear letter or word is, and what is meant. This is how OCR software (and humans) can recognise even quite difficult handwriting or poor quality print with a high degree of accuracy.

The problem with a postcode is that there is basically no context. If a postcode is being entered (particularly by a person in a foreign country who has no knowledge of the system) it is difficult to guess what the characters are supposed to be.

The issue is worse when you come to sound-alike. A lot of letters sound alike (BCPTV; FMNSX). This can be a problem in itself, but it is a bigger problem because characters that sound alike are more likely to be confused in short-term memory, and this is what leads to slips (mistakes by humans in transcribing or remembering the code). (A researcher called Baddeley researched all this in the 60's in an effort to understand short-term memory).

This is the reason why international practice is generally to use numbers. Where letters are used in a small number of countries, they are generally only used in certain positions and to the exclusion of numbers. The big exception to this is the UK which for historical reasons has a very vague model for what type of character should be at each position.

It is perfectly possible to number all the property access points of the country, present and future without using letters.

More importantly, it is possible to make the code meaningful and understandable in itself within these restrictions. Use the known, existing divisions as a starting point and work down from there.

This is not to say that number recognition is perfect, just that it is better than letter recognition.

Realistically, any postcoded item or service needs to have the first line of the address checked against the code before it is sent for delivery. This is why a database of addresses is more-or-less essential in practice, whatever sort of hieroglyphics you have in the code.

garydubh

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

It's not just 5 and S. It's B and 8. It's T and Y. It's C and G. It's Q and O/0; b and 6; the list goes on. Normally this is no problem in prose, because the context let's you guess what the unlear letter or word is, and what is meant. This is how OCR software (and humans) can recognise even quite difficult handwriting or poor quality print with a high degree of accuracy.

……………….OK - there is a point beyond which we lose track of reality and Antoin you have now taken us there!!

Stop - let me get this straight - you want to develop a postcode that works with no context at all??? i.e. with no associated address - so you want to be different to the whole rest of the world - deliver goods and services with just a post code on it? If that is your rationale - then the solution is to use Irish Grid Coordinates -12 numerals with some indication that they are Irish not UK - so 3 more characters - say "353" - then change them into a binary code - print a bar code and off you go - just make sure that the entrance to each property is surveyed to 1 meter accuracy and presented as the post code and that everyone has access to a bar code printer and those delivering have a barcode scanner and real world interpreter

Let's get back to reality......... Any code developed has to work in a context understandable by all the people who may handle it - that is a requirement as laid down in the Irish Government Specification as well as the requirement that it must support both Irish and English form addresses i.e. it must work in the context of an existing address! So there is the context that you require - I have stated this already in my reply to Yoda but his answer was simply that a sorter "may not read the complete address" - well it does and will continue to do so and if you are in any doubt about that then read on......

I have stated and independent experts from the postal world have also stated that if we are talking only about sorting mail - then a postcode is not required in Ireland at all – and I quote…. "Fundamentally An Post does not need a postcode system. The British Postal Consultancy Service advised An Post of this fact 25 years ago. Computers that sort the mail ceased to need simplistic postal codes at that time" - Hugh Colton Former Consultant with BPCS
.......................................And there is a fact from an expert - So there is no need for a traditional mail sorting, postal address database type post code because scanners and computers used in mail sorting can do the job by reading the complete address! So what you – Antoin and Yoda - are trying to design is already redundant before it can even be moved from the drawing board

However, there is most definitely a need for a code to satisfy all the other requirements of getting to an address - i.e. a navigation code and that is what PON Codes are - Position Orientated Navigation codes - for the 0.5 million commercial and emergency vehicles delivering services (including couriers) by road to Irish homes, businesses, meeting places and events - not to mention the private vehicles availing of the services of the hospitality industry or just trying to get to friends, weddings, christenings, funerals, car boot sales, fetes etc etc etc

You are both experts in your field - Yoda in writing systems and Antoin - well I am not quite sure what you are an expert in - is it running and writing Blogs??? And therefore you understand things on the basis of your expertise.

I am a professional navigator (academically and 30 years of practical real world experience including 11 years of supporting and training in land navigation, surveying and GIS mapping) - so I understand navigation and related GPS and Mapping technologies and can tell you that navigation is always undertaken in a context..... and in this case PON Codes work in the context of the final address. Anyone can get to within a few kilometers of the final destination with just an Irish Address - it is the final bit that is the problem – and the PON code will get you the final few kilometers to the door and allow you to have planned and optimsed the route for multiple addresses before hand. Nothing to do with "Storks" as sarcastically stated by Yoda in an earlier post

So when I invited Yoda to come meet me - we could meet in our offices - PON Code: W5K 59VN (or enter it in here to see where it is). So when you put this into the SatNav it will convert it to Latitude and Longitude using the algorithm and then show you the location on its installed map or, from the map, pick up the nearest road/townland, town, county - Church Bay Road, Crosshaven, Co. Cork - and display it to you. As you know the address you will be happy that you have not made a mistake (mixed up 5 and S) and ask the unit to guide you there i.e. it is working in a context of the complete address - which a mail sorter can do also by the way and even more easily if sorting by hand to suit Antoin's angle. All this is in the same way as some businessmen share and use Lat/longs these days, in the absence of an alternative, and if they make a mistake in putting it into their SatNav (frequently done even though they are mainly numerals) they will recognise the mistake straight away because it is in the wrong general area on the map.

PON codes are not intended to work in isolation - but they can and if written in capitals, as all Post Codes are and as PON Codes are designed to be - then the possibility of confusing characters is minimal. Furthermore, when there are only 7 with numerals only in some places, the chances are even further reduced and nothing like the fantasy issues Antoin has raised as a result of his discussions with a writing systems expert!!!! And, by the way, numerals and letters are just characters to any machine - it is those that do the programming that make them different.

And then finally to Antoin's point about characters sounding the same - does he believe that he is now a communications expert as well? I worked at sea for 20 years where we used the phonetic alphabet in radio communications as humans have done since radio was invented. Nowadays in all walks of life people naturally invent their own popular version of the phonetic alphabet and get by daily passing addresses etc over the phone as they have done in the UK with their own Post Code system for 10’s of years. Again this is not a problem for the adaptable and resourceful human beings that we are.

Now, I was accused by Yoda of not taking note of his arguments. To be fair, I have religiously addressed any argument that has been raised here on this board over a long time now. I think at this point - both Yoda and Antoin - you both need to start considering the well founded points that I am making.

It is understandable that you will both make arguments against PON Codes in order to defend your proposal which has been conceived only for sorting mail, (and therefore redundant before it starts according postal experts) is based on electoral divisions which may change (Electoral Areas/Divisions), would consist of at least 9 numerals or more if all individual properties were to be defined in all areas, it will require an expensive maintained address database to construct and use and may not be affordable by the persons that need to implement it - not to mention the fact that if someone needed to code a car boot sale in a field they would not be able to so. (NB using the existing Grid coordinates for Ireland would serve the same purpose without spending millions of Euros at all.

As I said before - we are coming from two different perspectives on this so we are unlikely to reach agreement here any time soon. As previously stated, I am more than willing to meet and discuss this further if you wish. However, if you are still unable to understand PON codes and their navigation context and continue to raise your issues here - I will continue to do my best to explain.

Thanks – more at www.irishpostcodes.ie

antoinolachtnai

garydubh wrote: »

……………….OK - there is a point beyond which we lose track of reality and Antoin you have now taken us there!!

Stop - let me get this straight - you want to develop a postcode that works with no context at all??? i.e. with no associated address - so you want to be different to the whole rest of the world - deliver goods and services with just a post code on it?

No. That is not what I said at all. In fact, I clearly stated the opposite in the second-last and last paragraphs of what I wrote.

In fairness, it is you that is proposing a postcode that is radically different from what exists in the whole rest of the world, by being based on geographical coordinates and not being linked to any database of addresses. There is not necessarily anything wrong with that in itself. I am just pointing it out. The system Michael and I are proposing is also quite different from what exists elsewhere and we think there are good reasons for this departure.

The British Postal Consultancy Service advised An Post of this fact 25 years ago. Computers that sort the mail ceased to need simplistic postal codes at that time" - Hugh Colton Former Consultant with BPCS[/I][/COLOR]
.......................................And there is a fact from an expert - So there is no need for a traditional mail sorting, postal address database type post code because scanners and computers used in mail sorting can do the job by reading the complete address!

That that looks to me like an opinion rather than a fact. I think you are quoting Hugh Colton out of context to suit your own arguments here. My understanding is that Mr Colton believes that no postcode of any sort is required at all, given modern address databases (which everyone has access to nowadays, not just An Post).

In any case, it is hard to see how what he says advances your argument.

The link you gave has nothing to do with what we are talking about. You directed readers to an interesting description of the ongoing process of revision of electoral areas for local elections. This process does not have any impact on electoral divisions. Electoral areas change regularly to meet the requirements of Article 16(2) of the constitution. Electoral divisions, on the other hand, in general do not change and have been more-or less stable since the 1840's.

Will you be publishing the PON address database you have developed to date? Is the algorithm for converting national grid coordinates to PON codes available to the public?

oscarBravo

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

My understanding is that Mr Colton believes that no postcode of any sort is required at all, given modern address databases (which everyone has access to nowadays, not just An Post).

Everyone? I'm not aware of an address database to which I have access.

It seems courier firms don't have access to one either: every time a new courier has to deliver something to my address (in a housing estate within an urban council area) a mobile phone call is required. Indeed, I thought a parcel had gone missing en route to my office address in Castlebar: it turned up a week later in a business premises up the road, where it had been delivered because of a one-word misreading of the address.

Is the algorithm for converting national grid coordinates to PON codes available to the public?

By the same token, have you published your proposed system? In fairness to Gary, he has described (and implemented) a system that achieves what it sets out to achieve.

garydubh

Some Points In reply To Antoin:

1. You said the letters of our alphabet should only be used in a context - I am stating that the context is the address which will always be associated with whatever code is being used until such time as we are using "Beam me up Scotty Machines" - which are a few light years away yet.

2. Your proposal is not different to most existing postcodes really - it requires an address database the same as most the world over - what is different is that you have chosen to use Electoral Division Polygons which are arbitrary , are little known, may change and someone will have to decide at some stage if a house on the line is inside or outside the division before allocating it a postcode. As I said before, you could have achieved the same with a Grid Coordinate and maybe a county code and probably the same number of characters in the end.

3. Hugh Colton's quotation is not taken out of context as you suggest - here it is in full: Fundamentally An Post does not need a postcode system. The British Postal Consultancy Service advised An Post of this fact 25 years ago. Computers that sort the mail ceased to need simplistic postal codes at that time. Statisticians and GIS users, not postal administrations, need a postcode system and have been able to make use of the various postcode systems to be found around the postal world and created at the expense of postal users. I contend that postcodes are simply intermediate technology and once databases are sufficiently developed the British/Irish style of short essay postal addressing will find any location without the need for a dedicated and costly to maintain postcode. Hugh Colton Former Consultant with BPCS.

So what he is saying is that a postcode for sorting mail is not required - just allow all those that are sorting mail have access to the Geodirectory or other address database - and those wanting to use post codes for non mail purposes should produce something suitable at their own expense!

4. We have produced not a postcode but a PON Code - a navigation code - at our own expence and for anyone's use in compliance with Mr Colton's recommendations and to a geographic specification recommened by the National Statistics Board.

5. You asked will I be publishing the database and algorithm - there are two elements to the database - a. for private properties which will not be publicly shared as stated on the website and b. the second is for businesses which will be shared when agreed by them to improve access to their offices and services - all as agreed and clearly guaranteed on our website. If you are in any way questioning the bonafides of this please look here as on our website: http://www.irishpostcodes.ie/privacypolicy.php and if anyone has any queries feel free to contact us at any time.

With respect to the algorithm - anyone who signs an agreement with GPS Ireland can have access to it as many have done already - just contact us to discuss.

And some questions for you Antoin then....
6. When will you be publishing the detail of your system with algorithm
7. How much will it cost to develop and who will fund this.
8. When it is created - will you be publishing the database
9. When will a beta test of your proposal be available for evaluation
10. What is your expertise in this area.
11. What will indicate in your postcode that it is not a telephone, serial or reference number.
12. If Geodirectory was widely available would there be a need for a mail only sorting code?

Talk soon.........................

Delphic

maybe this has been said already but how do you get these codes onto your satnav or phone? Have loadsa places been mapped and is there a place where you can get them?

There's actually more than one place providing these location postcodes - it's gonna be pretty confusing if everyone is using different ones depending on which one they decide to use. or are the same ones used?

I googled map directions and found another site - irish i presume and they give you a code for your house without any messing. it's much better than the Pon one where as someone said you have to fill in a form that looks like it was written by an insurance company and then have to wait or mess around with a map pointer thing which didnt work (for me anyway. )

Must say the code was great for giving to visitors over the xmas who couldn't find house (endless problem for me if you don't live in a built-up area), and difficult to describe to them over phone. gave them code and they put it into the website, and up pops map. some of my friends got theirs as well once they saw it. It's great idea but pretty limited until the phone manufacturers and sat nav guys (get the finger out Tom Tom/Garm) take them on board so you can follow code in your car altho i know you can print out map which is pretty good too.

garydubh

Delphic wrote: »

Must say the code was great for giving to visitors over the xmas who couldn't find house (endless problem for me if you don't live in a built-up area), and difficult to describe to them over phone. gave them code and they put it into the website, and up pops map. some of my friends got theirs as well once they saw it. It's great idea but pretty limited until the phone manufacturers and sat nav guys (get the finger out Tom Tom/Garm) take them on board so you can follow code in your car altho i know you can print out map which is pretty good too.

It has been tested on Garmin units since June last year. A new website and an announcement regarding wider availability on the way. The current website is only for testing and form filling will be gone in the new one.

Thanks for the feedback - keep an eye out at www.irishpostcodes.ie for update announcements over the next few weeks.

garydubh

Delphic wrote: »

eh - didn't realise i wasn't giving you feedback, garyddbh. I was talking about a better code system (tocode) that I used over xmas - do you own it that one as well as the Pon one you've been pushing on here?

tocode?????? - never heard of it but maybe your talking about the one that you can put in "DOG FACE" as the code and you find that it applies to the poor people up around Sligo. If so - did not know that the website was still up as I know earlier in the year there was an article written on another blog about it - undesirable words got generated and then real placenames could be put in and they would appear in completely different places - I think Nenagh was an example which when put in as a Code it was shown in Limerick. It was operated by some bulk mail/mass marketing company???

Delphic

Whatever. the one I used was very good.

Delphic

Garydbh - I got a second reply from you in my mailbox which doesn't seem to be up here on boards.ie. You said to go look at another website - had a look at it this evening but don't know what it's about. There's sales stuff from you about your company on it similar to what you've posted on here.

Anyway, thanks for sending the name of that website I used though - - I remember it now. will look at it again tomorrow.

af_thefragile

I think it'ld be useful to have postcodes. I always don't know what to fill in for the postcode when you're filling in a form for your address...
I just put 1 or something usually...

Wait this thread is a year old...!
Where are the postcodes???....

Delphic

af_thefragile wrote: »

I think it'ld be useful to have postcodes. I always don't know what to fill in for the postcode when you're filling in a form for your address...
I just put 1 or something usually...

Wait this thread is a year old...!
Where are the postcodes???....

Nowhere it would appear. there appears to be a few companies busy creating some like the gps guy on here and this other crowd ticode.ie who both have similar systems in place, with a location code system for your house. But I'd say they'll be waiting on whatever minister is meant to be putting this in place for some time.

garydubh

Delphic wrote: »

Garydbh - I got a second reply from you in my mailbox which doesn't seem to be up here on boards.ie. You said to go look at another website - had a look at it this evening but don't know what it's about. There's sales stuff from you about your company on it similar to what you've posted on here.

No I did not send you any other mail of any sort - please check again and be careful - I do not know you and have no way of contacting you personally - sorry what sales stuff??????........

garydubh

af_thefragile wrote: »

Wait this thread is a year old...!
Where are the postcodes???....

Exactly - if you have a read of the discussion you will find that a National proposal for a PostCode by Jan 2008 has not happened and there is no published alternative. Consequently, another system already in use has been discussed here since - worth having a read back......

SeanW

Although I like the idea behind the PON system, I agree with the posters above who said that the use of both 5 and S, 1 and I, 0 and O etc could cause confusion, and I think it would have been better if, when using numeric codes, numbers that can look like letters, or vice versa, should not have been used. Because codes can be written by people with sloppy handwriting, or by computers and printing equipment with Sans Serif typefaces.

I s'pose its too late to change it now though.

garydubh

SeanW wrote: »

Although I like the idea behind the PON system, I agree with the posters above who said that the use of both 5 and S, 1 and I, 0 and O etc could cause confusion, and I think it would have been better if, when using numeric codes, numbers that can look like letters, or vice versa, should not have been used. Because codes can be written by people with sloppy handwriting, or by computers and printing equipment with Sans Serif typefaces.

I s'pose its too late to change it now though.

SeanW - no - not too late at all - modifictions can be made if required - no problem without changing the whole system as we have been running in Beta for testing up to now. However, you should know that this point may have been exaggerated somewhat as there is no I or O or L in PON Codes and several other characters have also been removed. The 5 and S seems to be a point for debate but only in the context of it being raised by someone with a competing system. I have argued that 1. PON Codes like all Post Codes are written in Capitals which removes handwriting related issues to a large extent and 2. PON Codes like all Post Codes are read in conjunction with the address by scanning machines - which means that the possibility for error is also further removed. On SatNav's when the PON Code is entered, it will come back with the nearest road/townland,town/county name to the entered PON Code so that the user will spot any error if made.

Also it should be noted that there are several positions in the 7 Characters of a PON Code where only letters or numbers can appear. So with all these points taken into account, room for error is minimal and no more an issue than it always will be when human error has to be allowed for which, in itself, can never be fully eliminated.

There is a lot of design and field testing already gone into PON codes !

sceptre

That's a forum reply that was made and subsequently changed by the user. Nothing odd, you're only getting it because you subscribed to the thread and chose the option that emails you the thread posts. Nothing odd or strange, certainly nothing to be paranoid about.

garydubh

Delphic wrote: »

Wasn't paranoid - was just puzzled as to why garydubh didn't recall sending me the post.

Just to reiterate;- I did not send you anything - I do not know you - your contact information is not posted here and, therefore, I have no way of sending e-mail to you ! Glad that's cleared up!