Eircode - its implemetation (merged)

The CSO's statistics gathering needs are irrelevant to Eircode. It's meant to be a stand alone system that uniquely identifies addresses. You couldn't keep changing people's postal codes to link up with whatever the CSO decides to do year to year. The codes are still useful to it and you can still break them down into smaller area and use them in lots of different ways.

My view is it is that there was no perfect solution to this and Eircode is doing a reasonable job.

Had they attempted to rollout totally hierarchical postal codes that defined smaller and smaller areas viably in the code, you would have immediately turned it political and people would have been demanding code changes to suit address snobbery or refusing to use them at all.

The amount of fuss that went on about Dublin 6W years ago shows just how ridiculous these things can get.

You also get huge arguments over telephone area codes in the UK. https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/furious-900000-housebuyers-outraged-after-10162798

( Due to the technology historically used in the British telephone network, area codes were often very small and only covered a single town. That resulted in all sorts of arguments like the above when towns grew into neighbouring codes. It's different in big British cities, and also here due to a history of different technologies being used. I won't bore you with the details, but it meant more you could have a lot more exchanges in a given area code than in the original uk systems).

Overall, I think Eircode works and you'll see the volume of post with the codes on them ramp up significantly as utilities and banks start integrating it. That's what will ultimately drive wider awareness.

Also it's already being used for utilities, like checking for OpenEir and Siro rollout of fibre services. I've even used it with Dominos pizza instead of entering my address.

The disastrous dimension to Eircodes is that An Post does not use them even though they received substantial money to amend their address reading software. A consequence of not having to use them on letter post is that they are not being used by probably 99% plus of persons and are not embedded in all public sector databases. Hence they are evolving into being used mainly as a coded form of X/Y coordinates and as a kind of index for looking up copies of the Geodirectory and ECAD databases. This only realises a small part of their potential. If they were used and captured by default then national databases would be hugely more valuable e.g. researchers could track the geographical pattern in the outbreak of diseases or duplication in registers could be more easily identified.

If the upfront decision included a knowledge that An Post would not use them then I think LOC8 codes would have been a better choice.

A job half done.

echat wrote: »

The disastrous dimension to Eircodes is that An Post does not use them even though they received substantial money to amend their address reading software. A consequence of not having to use them on letter post is that they are not being used by probably 99% plus of persons and are not embedded in all public sector databases. Hence they are evolving into being used mainly as a coded form of X/Y coordinates and as a kind of index for looking up copies of the Geodirectory and ECAD databases. This only realises a small part of their potential. If they were used and captured by default then national databases would be hugely more valuable e.g. researchers could track the geographical pattern in the outbreak of diseases or duplication in registers could be more easily identified.

If the upfront decision included a knowledge that An Post would not use them then I think LOC8 codes would have been a better choice.

A job half done.

On the basis of which public data are you presenting these facts? Because they've been refuted by published data many times in this thread.

sondagefaux

Skedaddle wrote: »

The CSO's statistics gathering needs are irrelevant to Eircode. It's meant to be a stand alone system that uniquely identifies addresses. You couldn't keep changing people's postal codes to link up with whatever the CSO decides to do year to year. The codes are still useful to it and you can still break them down into smaller area and use them in lots of different ways.

My view is it is that there was no perfect solution to this and Eircode is doing a reasonable job.

Had they attempted to rollout totally hierarchical postal codes that defined smaller and smaller areas viably in the code, you would have immediately turned it political and people would have been demanding code changes to suit address snobbery or refusing to use them at all.

The amount of fuss that went on about Dublin 6W years ago shows just how ridiculous these things can get.

You also get huge arguments over telephone area codes in the UK. https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/furious-900000-housebuyers-outraged-after-10162798

( Due to the technology historically used in the British telephone network, area codes were often very small and only covered a single town. That resulted in all sorts of arguments like the above when towns grew into neighbouring codes. It's different in big British cities, and also here due to a history of different technologies being used. I won't bore you with the details, but it meant more you could have a lot more exchanges in a given area code than in the original uk systems).

Overall, I think Eircode works and you'll see the volume of post with the codes on them ramp up significantly as utilities and banks start integrating it. That's what will ultimately drive wider awareness.

Also it's already being used for utilities, like checking for OpenEir and Siro rollout of fibre services. I've even used it with Dominos pizza instead of entering my address.

If I had a B&B or other business in the countryside, I would make absolutely certain that all of my publicity included the Eircode.

It really is the easiest way for people to find you if you're located outside of an area with street names and numbers/building names.

As for telephone area codes, it's high time they were scrapped and Ireland had one prefix, like in Northern Ireland.

One prefix, with 8 digit phone numbers, would be enough to cover the entire amount of normal landline numbers in the state, especially since their use is declining.

I have a landline number since it comes with my broadband, but I don't use it, don't have a landline handset and so never give the number to anyone.

Special prefixes for non-geographic numbers could be retained.

They're not being changed, as it's hugely disruptive to both the providers and end users and achieves no advantages whatsoever. You'd be causing mayhem for no real reason other than to tidy numbers up. The cost of major phone number changes is very significant. It's not technically difficult to do as the network is totally digital but the costs are advertising changes and changing stored numbers. It's a significant waste of time and resources for end-users.

The policy is to expand them to 0XX YXX XXXX, but only in areas where they run out.

There's no technical reason to have shorter numbers or abolish area codes.

The number of landline numbers is also falling meaning changes are even less necessary. We've 1,408,561 landlines (PSTN, ISDN and VoIP) in service. That's down from over 2 million in 2011.

Compared to mobile where we've 5,971,752 (4,881,306 if you exclude machine to machine and broadband only).

There's also vastly more voice traffic on the mobile nets than the fixed nets and 83% of Irish mobiles are currently smartphones.

So basically the landline's already on its way out other than for niche and business use and most businesses are moving away from ISDN and PSTN to sip trunks and hosted PBX, so that's even more landline numbering gone as those services don't need complex setups with numbers routing to numbers.

So realistically at this stage, there'll be no rush to change numbering. It'll just dwindle out of use naturally.

plodder

Skedaddle wrote: »

The CSO's statistics gathering needs are irrelevant to Eircode.

This isn't about the CSO at all. Their needs are catered for.

It's meant to be a stand alone system that uniquely identifies addresses. You couldn't keep changing people's postal codes to link up with whatever the CSO decides to do year to year. The codes are still useful to it and you can still break them down into smaller area and use them in lots of different ways.

With respect, the census is held no more than once every five years. They don't change things every year. The data that has been presented so far, over estimates the number of postcodes that would have changed. We need accurate information to discuss this point.

My view is it is that there was no perfect solution to this and Eircode is doing a reasonable job.

Agreed. There is no perfect solution and it's doing a reasonable job in some respects. I'm still concerned about the privacy aspect. For what it's worth I think a postcode should be anonymous, and what eircode is should be called a location code. Eircodes are basically geographic cookies, and it's going to be interesting to see where they turn up over time. If you want both the anonymous postcode and the specific location code to be integrated, then a hierarchical code is the only way to do it.

Had they attempted to rollout totally hierarchical postal codes that defined smaller and smaller areas viably in the code, you would have immediately turned it political and people would have been demanding code changes to suit address snobbery or refusing to use them at all.

The amount of fuss that went on about Dublin 6W years ago shows just how ridiculous these things can get.

Dublin 6W happened at the end of the Dept. of P&T era. So, it was inherently political. The process of even getting a phone line had politicians all over it. Different era.

I accept there would be some controversy whipped up by the media no doubt, but not the amount suggested.

You also get huge arguments over telephone area codes in the UK. https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/furious-900000-housebuyers-outraged-after-10162798

Phone numbers are a slightly different issue with modern technology, but anyone who asks to get their UK postcode changed for the same snobbery reason gets short shrift.

( Due to the technology historically used in the British telephone network, area codes were often very small and only covered a single town. That resulted in all sorts of arguments like the above when towns grew into neighbouring codes. It's different in big British cities, and also here due to a history of different technologies being used. I won't bore you with the details, but it meant more you could have a lot more exchanges in a given area code than in the original uk systems).

Overall, I think Eircode works and you'll see the volume of post with the codes on them ramp up significantly as utilities and banks start integrating it. That's what will ultimately drive wider awareness.

Also it's already being used for utilities, like checking for OpenEir and Siro rollout of fibre services. I've even used it with Dominos pizza instead of entering my address.

There's no doubt we can argue until the cows come home, the relative merits/disadvantages of the two ways of doing it.

But, one thing is clear to me. Having decided to go the route of using an opaque, unstructured code, the decision should have been to make a significant, useful chunk of the data free for use. By all means, charge for the address file, like in the UK, but why should people be nickel-and-dimed in Ireland to do things you can do with other countries postcodes for free? The logical answer to that is to provide a database for free of all Eircodes linked to their small area code at the very least. That would be roughly equivalent to what you can do with the Uk postcode for free.

fieldofsheep

echat wrote: »

The disastrous dimension to Eircodes is that An Post does not use them even though they received substantial money to amend their address reading software. A consequence of not having to use them on letter post is that they are not being used by probably 99% plus of persons and are not embedded in all public sector databases. Hence they are evolving into being used mainly as a coded form of X/Y coordinates and as a kind of index for looking up copies of the Geodirectory and ECAD databases. This only realises a small part of their potential. If they were used and captured by default then national databases would be hugely more valuable e.g. researchers could track the geographical pattern in the outbreak of diseases or duplication in registers could be more easily identified.

If the upfront decision included a knowledge that An Post would not use them then I think LOC8 codes would have been a better choice.

A job half done.

With regards mandating their use by Government services, this is being addressed by circular 19/2017:

http://circulars.gov.ie/pdf/circular/per/2017/19.pdf

I know this will benefit us where I work, instead of having to deal with unvalidated free form address fields.

I don't really see how it's any more of a data protection or privacy issue than your address. All its doing is reducing that to a short code in reality.

In some rural areas people don't have what you could call an address, rather they're just hidden behind local knowledge of a postal worker. All they have is a name and a townland. So effectively, Eircode had become their first true address.

plodder

Skedaddle wrote: »

I don't really see how it's any more of a data protection or privacy issue than your address. All its doing is reducing that to a short code in reality.

So long as anyone you give your eircode to, and anyone they give it to, understands that it identifies your address, then there won't be a problem. The trouble is that most (countries') postcodes don't identify addresses. They are anonymous and generally not handled as carefully as addresses. So, organisations/companies with reasonable privacy policies might still share data based on postcodes without (to their knowledge) compromising anyone's privacy. They'll have to make sure that Irish postcodes are either removed or truncated to the routing key before sharing any such data.

BonnieSituation

plodder wrote: »

So long as anyone you give your eircode to, and anyone they give it to, understands that it identifies your address, then there won't be a problem. The trouble is that most (countries') postcodes don't identify addresses. They are anonymous and generally not handled as carefully as addresses. So, organisations/companies with reasonable privacy policies might still share data based on postcodes without (to their knowledge) compromising anyone's privacy. They'll have to make sure that Irish postcodes are either removed or truncated to the routing key before sharing any such data.

Why?

Addresses are already out there.

Google Maps, electoral register, Geodirectory, using your eyes on a street...

TheChizler wrote: »

On the basis of which public data are you presenting these facts? Because they've been refuted by published data many times in this thread.

1. I haven't seen any public data on Eircode take-up rates, can you please post a reference to where you saw them.

2. The main public sector databases were encoded in the first half of 2015 before the launch of Eircodes. A unique address is required to assign an Eircode. So around 60% of Revenue and Social Protection clients probably got Eircodes and the rate for Department of Agriculture clients was probably less than 15%. So in the last 30 months have those rates increased or decreased?

3. The routing key is useless given that An Post are not requiring it. The only saving grace is that they used the Dublin postal districts.

4. Is this what was expected 30 months on for probably around €30 million.

PDVerse

echat wrote: »

1. I haven't seen any public data on Eircode take-up rates, can you please post a reference to where you saw them.

2. The main public sector databases were encoded in the first half of 2015 before the launch of Eircodes. A unique address is required to assign an Eircode. So around 60% of Revenue and Social Protection clients probably got Eircodes and the rate for Department of Agriculture clients was probably less than 15%. So in the last 30 months have those rates increased or decreased?

3. The routing key is useless given that An Post are not requiring it. The only saving grace is that they used the Dublin postal districts.

4. Is this what was expected 30 months on for probably around €30 million.

Eircode is used over 1 million times a week. You can watch them being entered on websites in real time here. Government departments and Local Authorities are integrating Eircode into systems and processes as IT systems are changed. This saves on implementation costs.

PDVerse wrote: »

Eircode is used over 1 million times a week. You can watch them being entered on websites in real time here. Government departments and Local Authorities are integrating Eircode into systems and processes as IT systems are changed. This saves on implementation costs.

After around 30 months DPER issue a circular telling government departments to create a field for Eircode in their databases, really, after €30 million was spent they have to tell the public sector to create a field for it so as to create the possibility of capturing them.

So there are around 2.5 million Eircodes and one million are being used every week or is that one being used one million times?

p.s. any figures on what % are being used on letter post?

echat wrote: »

1. I haven't seen any public data on Eircode take-up rates, can you please post a reference to where you saw them.

2. The main public sector databases were encoded in the first half of 2015 before the launch of Eircodes. A unique address is required to assign an Eircode. So around 60% of Revenue and Social Protection clients probably got Eircodes and the rate for Department of Agriculture clients was probably less than 15%. So in the last 30 months have those rates increased or decreased?

3. The routing key is useless given that An Post are not requiring it. The only saving grace is that they used the Dublin postal districts.

4. Is this what was expected 30 months on for probably around €30 million.

I didn't say anything about take up rates, what you explicitly said was that An Post doesn't use them. We've had posters who are heavily involved in the industry state that they do and provide information to back them up. You then came up with a figure of 'probably 99%' of people don't use them. On what basis are you presenting this estimate? And AFAIK the €30M is the cost over (IIRC) 10 years not 30 months as stated by PDVerse and others in the past.

It will take time for them to be used as universally as UK postcodes which began to be rollered out in 1959 and were still not in universal use until relatively recent decades.

Eircode is still brand new and it’ll just take a good few years to bed in. As people start to find it useful, it’ll start to see widespread use.

I’m already finding my electricity bill arriving with one on it and I didn’t ever give them my eircode so they utilities are obviously adopting it

Sam Russell

Skedaddle wrote: »

It will take time for them to be used as universally as UK postcodes which began to be rollered out in 1959 and were still not in universal use until relatively recent decades.

Eircode is still brand new and it’ll just take a good few years to bed in. As people start to find it useful, it’ll start to see widespread use.

I’m already finding my electricity bill arriving with one on it and I didn’t ever give them my eircode so they utilities are obviously adopting it

The utility know where you live, even if it is in the back of nowhere, so it is straightforward for them to identify your Eircode. Not so simple for your bank, as they only know who you are and the address you gave them.

In the areas that do not have unique addresses, this is a real problem, but it is where Eircode comes into its own. It is a pity that more effort was not put in to getting a standard (that is Official) address for all places in the state.

Now Google Maps identifies Eircodes with unique address locations, it is easy to find an identified address, but impossible if one starts with a non-unique address, and cannot identify the actual place.

For some reason, I have yet to see an Eircode nailed to a gate post in the country.

sondagefaux

Sam Russell wrote: »

Skedaddle wrote: »

It will take time for them to be used as universally as UK postcodes which began to be rollered out in 1959 and were still not in universal use until relatively recent decades.

Eircode is still brand new and it’ll just take a good few years to bed in. As people start to find it useful, it’ll start to see widespread use.

I’m already finding my electricity bill arriving with one on it and I didn’t ever give them my eircode so they utilities are obviously adopting it

The utility know where you live, even if it is in the back of nowhere, so it is straightforward for them to identify your Eircode. Not so simple for your bank, as they only know who you are and the address you gave them.

In the areas that do not have unique addresses, this is a real problem, but it is where Eircode comes into its own. It is a pity that more effort was not put in to getting a standard (that is Official) address for all places in the state.

Now Google Maps identifies Eircodes with unique address locations, it is easy to find an identified address, but impossible if one starts with a non-unique address, and cannot identify the actual place.

For some reason, I have yet to see an Eircode nailed to a gate post in the country.

If you give a bank a utility bill with your Eircode as proof of address, they can add your Eircode to your address without asking for it separately.

As for Eircodes on gateposts, have a look at the twitter account of autoaddress. They have a few examples of GAA clubs etc with Eircodes displayed at their entrances.

Just because the postman isn’t using it doesn’t mean that they’re not being used in sorting. Letters are sorted in a few large facilities for the whole country. It’s not done like the old days at all anymore. The postman / postwoman also knows the route intimately and doesn’t need anything extra most of the time. It doesn’t mean that the code isn’t useful to the sorting machines or that it isn’t useful to post office couriers.

Also plenty of other couriers and delivery people so use them. An Post’s not the only user and they were specifically designed not to be post office only.

Sam Russell

sondagefaux wrote: »

If you give a bank a utility bill with your Eircode as proof of address, they can add your Eircode to your address without asking for it separately.

As for Eircodes on gateposts, have a look at the twitter account of autoaddress. They have a few examples of GAA clubs etc with Eircodes displayed at their entrances.

The point about Eircodes are they are not designed to be useful for people to use.

If the Bank gets an Eircode from a bill, that is fine but I was pointing out that the utility knows the location of their meter so do not need you to tell them. For non-unique addresses, it is nearly impossible to find out the Eircode without asking the addressee for it, which is not always possible. It is not something that people make public in any way, like nailing it to their gate post or including it in a return address, but that might change.

If An Post differentiated on postal rates favouring those that use it, it would become very common to see it on envelopes.

TheChizler wrote: »

I didn't say anything about take up rates, what you explicitly said was that An Post doesn't use them. We've had posters who are heavily involved in the industry state that they do and provide information to back them up. You then came up with a figure of 'probably 99%' of people don't use them. On what basis are you presenting this estimate? And AFAIK the €30M is the cost over (IIRC) 10 years not 30 months as stated by PDVerse and others in the past.

The basic idea of a postcode is for people to write them on an envelope so the postal body can more efficiently deliver post. You seem to be suggesting that An Post is using them internally in some way? They stated many times that they don't need them because they had already developed a system that managed without them.

I am basing the 99% as my estimate of what % of persons sending post are writing an Eircode as part of the address and I have asked a number of times if anyone has any actual usage rates.

The 30 months is the period between 13th July 2015 when they were launched and 13th January 2018. Yes all of 30 months ago.

The €30 million has already been spent much of it before the launch.

Skedaddle wrote: »

It will take time for them to be used as universally as UK postcodes which began to be rollered out in 1959 and were still not in universal use until relatively recent decades.

Eircode is still brand new and it’ll just take a good few years to bed in. As people start to find it useful, it’ll start to see widespread use.

I’m already finding my electricity bill arriving with one on it and I didn’t ever give them my eircode so they utilities are obviously adopting it

My guess is that the Eircode was given to ESB before the launch and they recently got around to using it.

Schorpio

Sam Russell wrote: »

The point about Eircodes are they are not designed to be useful for people to use.

If the Bank gets an Eircode from a bill, that is fine but I was pointing out that the utility knows the location of their meter so do not need you to tell them. For non-unique addresses, it is nearly impossible to find out the Eircode without asking the addressee for it, which is not always possible. It is not something that people make public in any way, like nailing it to their gate post or including it in a return address, but that might change.

If An Post differentiated on postal rates favouring those that use it, it would become very common to see it on envelopes.

How do you mean they aren't designed to be useful for people to use? How are you defining useful? I'm not trying to critise - I'm genuinely wondering.

I think they are extremely useful. Over Christmas I had a few places to go where I'd never been before. Everytime I asked for an Eircode and was given it straight away. It never sounded like anyone had to check, or look i up. Also, made navigating an absolute breeze. Also had a handyman come over a few months ago. Just gave him my Eircode (nothing else) and he found me without any trouble. For years I've had to guide people on the phone, which is a right pain.

Also, regarding the seeming randomness of them - this prevents a 'desirable postcode' effect, which I guarantee it would have affected urban centers like Dublin.

Sam Russell

Schorpio wrote: »

How do you mean they aren't designed to be useful for people to use? How are you defining useful? I'm not trying to critise - I'm genuinely wondering.

Useful for people means useful unaided. If I give someone my address, they find my house no bother. If I give them my Eircode, they must look it up on a computer. I did not say they were not useful for people, I said they were not designed to be useful for people to use.

I think they are extremely useful. Over Christmas I had a few places to go where I'd never been before. Everytime I asked for an Eircode and was given it straight away. It never sounded like anyone had to check, or look i up. Also, made navigating an absolute breeze. Also had a handyman come over a few months ago. Just gave him my Eircode (nothing else) and he found me without any trouble. For years I've had to guide people on the phone, which is a right pain.

Well, of course they can be used in that way, with the aid of Google maps - no doubt about it. However, without google, it is not quite so easy. Non-unique address areas, they are essential. Eliminating the non-unique address is obviously another task that will not be done anytime soon.

Also, regarding the seeming randomness of them - this prevents a 'desirable postcode' effect, which I guarantee it would have affected urban centers like Dublin.

Of course, that is why they retained D6W xxxx.

I view Eircode as a missed opportunity, but if it is taken up by 90% of users, it will be a success. The state will benefit from it, no doubt, as will business.

PDVerse

Sam Russell wrote: »

If the Bank gets an Eircode from a bill, that is fine but I was pointing out that the utility knows the location of their meter so do not need you to tell them. For non-unique addresses, it is nearly impossible to find out the Eircode without asking the addressee for it, which is not always possible. It is not something that people make public in any way, like nailing it to their gate post or including it in a return address, but that might change.

This is a common belief, but at the time of Eircode launch it certainly wasn't true. People believe that ESB Networks have the exact location of their meter, and thus can easily identify the Eircode. They don't. Usually they have a sub-station location that feeds a number of houses, this is especially the case in rural areas for non-unique addresses. I'm not an expert in this area, and I have no knowledge of what has changed since July 2015 or whether the roll out of smart metering will change this (hopefully it will).

Eircode makes non-unique addresses unique, in the same manner that a house number on a street makes an address unique. If someone only gives you their street address there isn't any way to find out the house number by looking at the list of addresses or looking at the locations on a map (assuming you've never visited) unless they tell you their house number. Similarly for rural non-unique addresses, the person needs to provide their Eircode. This isn't a design flaw, its the solution to a problem.

Sam Russell wrote: »

Useful for people means useful unaided. If I give someone my address, they find my house no bother.

This isn't correct. No one holds the countries addresses in their head. You either reference a map or ask someone directions. No one could find my house in my estate unaided. Most people reference online maps, e.g. Google Maps for this task. In this way providing an Eircode or a unique address are equivalent. Eircode solves the non-unique address problem without having to change addresses. This wasn't a missed opportunity, it was a design goal.

BonnieSituation

Sam Russell wrote: »

Useful for people means useful unaided. If I give someone my address, they find my house no bother. If I give them my Eircode, they must look it up on a computer. I did not say they were not useful for people, I said they were not designed to be useful for people to use.

I see this weird statement being made. Why would you give someone your Eircode on its own? Unless of course they solely requested it I don't see why you'd do that and then complain that they couldn't find your house.

It's frequently trotted out as a criticism of the system that "No-one can find my house with just the Eircode"... cmon!!!

Few can find your house with

John Murphy,
Tubber,
Gort,
Co Clare... either!

Mad argument to make!

Well, of course they can be used in that way, with the aid of Google maps - no doubt about it. However, without google, it is not quite so easy. Non-unique address areas, they are essential. Eliminating the non-unique address is obviously another task that will not be done anytime soon.

Removing non-unique addresses would have been ideal but the finance and the political will was not there to do it. Besides. It would have taken years to get right and then we'd still have to wait on postcodes.

Remember the hassle of when some people had to be reminded that their geographic and postal addresses are different. Imagine then informing them when you sort out their new unique address that they live in a different townland than they thought they did. It would be a mare.

This was a better solution.

We got a 21st century solution to a 21st century problem. Eircodes are really good at what they're designed for. Which isn't stats.

Of course, that is why they retained D6W xxxx.

I view Eircode as a missed opportunity, but if it is taken up by 90% of users, it will be a success. The state will benefit from it, no doubt, as will business.

I don't know of anyone under 40 NOT using them.

---

also, UK postcodes in all their awfulness were introduced ca. 1959. NI didn't start to be coded til 1970 and wasn't complete til 1974. It took that long in part because they had to make addresses unique ie. name all those bóthríns that dot the Ulster landscape. The townland system was also butchered. No way would that sort of thing be allowed happened here down the sticks.

---

Also, as per wiki, in the UK, 2750 new codes get generated each month, and 2500 get deleted.

oscarBravo

Sam Russell wrote: »

Useful for people means useful unaided.

That's a self-serving sort of a definition.

If I give someone my address, they find my house no bother.

If I give someone my address, they won't find my house. If I give them some other addresses I could cite, they may not even look on the right side of town (non-unique townland names near the same town).

If I give them my Eircode, they must look it up on a computer.

If I give you an address and tell you you're not allowed to look it up on a computer or on a map, or ask anyone for directions, would you be able to find it? "Useful unaided", remember.

It's just a wee bit weird that some people are working so very, very hard to convince themselves that something so useful actually isn't. It's actually a pretty compelling example of confirmation bias.

echat wrote: »

The basic idea of a postcode is for people to write them on an envelope so the postal body can more efficiently deliver post. You seem to be suggesting that An Post is using them internally in some way? They stated many times that they don't need them because they had already developed a system that managed without them.

I'm suggesting it because of quotes from an Post saying they've installed the system in their sorting centres and PDVerse saying they specifically use the routing key in sorting centres when manually sorting mail; that is, anything larger than a normal envelope.

I am basing the 99% as my estimate of what % of persons sending post are writing an Eircode as part of the address and I have asked a number of times if anyone has any actual usage rates.

So you're basing your estimate on your own estimate? If you don't have actually rates why put such a specific number on it?

Just on a piece of actual implementation, Costa now can locate your nearest Costa coffee shop if you enter your Eircode on their website. How useful that is is debatable but shows companies are becoming more aware of it and happy to integrate it.