[OT] Postal counties to be dropped from the Postcode Address File
 

On Sat, 31 Jul 2010 19:07:34 +0100, Tom Anderson
wrote:

Evening all,

Not related to transport, but a topic which flares up here now and then:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-10825499

I was particularly pleased to see the 'Romford is/is not in Essex'
argument being brought up immediately in the comments. Now, could someone
get on there and tell them about Metropolitan Kent?

I don't see why the UK postal addresses shouldn't be the same as
Continental ones - i.e. just "number streetname, town postcode". The
street name is itself superfluous in our postcode system, but acts as
a useful "checksum" (as well as making it easier for the postman).

Neil
--
Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK
To reply put my first name before the at.

Postal counties to be dropped from the Postcode Address File
 

On 1 Aug, 12:57, Roland Perry wrote:
In message
, at
02:49:26 on Sun, 1 Aug 2010, MIG remarked:

I was particularly pleased to see the 'Romford is/is not in Essex'
argument being brought up immediately in the comments.

Having been brought up in the vicinity, I'd say that all of those were
in Essex, as is [ObLRT:] Upminster and Epping.

This change will finally sort out a couple of villages in the south
Chilterns which are physically in Bucks, but with a Henley (Oxon)
address, and a Reading (Berks) Postcode!

"Physically"?

As in... the county boundary on the map.

All these boundaries are administrative for one purpose
or another. *(Although for some reason people seem to think that past
administrative boundaries are "real" and current ones are not.)

I'm not aware that the Bucks/Oxon border has changed very recently, in
that vicinity (other bits of Oxon border have changed in my lifetime).

The objections to the proposed change seem to come from people who
haven't cottoned on that their postal address is not meant to be a
description of where they live,

"Where you live" does have an effect on services provided by the
relevant councils, and hence on one's lifestyle. Planning and Education,
for example, can vary quite dramatically across a country border.


That may be important, but it may not be reasonable to expect the
Royal Mail to provide the means of deducing it, when they have a more
important responsibility to record delivery points so that they can be
reached efficiently from delivery offices and so on.

And anyway, I agree that the provision of things like planning and
education (and who you pay local taxes to) are most important in
determining where an address really "is", but that consideration puts
Romford resolutely in the London Borough of Havering, not Essex.

[OT] Postal counties to be dropped from the Postcode AddressFile
 

Neil Williams wrote on 01 August 2010
22:06:39 ...
On Sat, 31 Jul 2010 19:07:34 +0100, Tom Anderson
wrote:

Evening all,

Not related to transport, but a topic which flares up here now and then:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-10825499

I was particularly pleased to see the 'Romford is/is not in Essex'
argument being brought up immediately in the comments. Now, could someone
get on there and tell them about Metropolitan Kent?

I don't see why the UK postal addresses shouldn't be the same as
Continental ones - i.e. just "number streetname, town postcode".

Because our postcode system has a far finer resolution than most other
countries, and therefore enables greater automation and efficiency in
Royal Mail (in theory), as well as enabling many other applications such
as satnav and location finding on online maps. Why would you want to
degrade our excellent postcode system?
--
Richard J.
(to email me, swap 'uk' and 'yon' in address)

[OT] Postal counties to be dropped from the Postcode Address File
 

On Sun, 01 Aug 2010 23:35:36 +0100, "Richard J."
wrote:

I don't see why the UK postal addresses shouldn't be the same as
Continental ones - i.e. just "number streetname, town postcode".

Because our postcode system has a far finer resolution than most other
countries, and therefore enables greater automation and efficiency in
Royal Mail (in theory), as well as enabling many other applications such
as satnav and location finding on online maps. Why would you want to
degrade our excellent postcode system?

When did I say I wanted to do that? I basically agreed that the
principle of a county in an address was pointless and that we should
use:-

"20 Anystreet
Anytown AB1 2CD"

as our address format. Of course, you only *need* "20 AB1 2CD", but
the inclusion of the street and post town provide a useful "checksum"
to ensure the postcode is correct, and the street address probably
assists the postman on his walk as well.

We could feasibly go to "20 Anystreet AB1 2CD" and even remove the
post town, but without any kind of "checksum" I would imagine a lot
more post would end up in the wrong place.

Neil
--
Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK
To reply put my first name before the at.

Postal counties to be dropped from the Postcode Address File
 

On 2 Aug, 07:01, Neil Williams wrote:
On Sun, 01 Aug 2010 23:35:36 +0100, "Richard J."

wrote:
I don't see why the UK postal addresses shouldn't be the same as
Continental ones - i.e. just "number streetname, town postcode".

Because our postcode system has a far finer resolution than most other
countries, and therefore enables greater automation and efficiency in
Royal Mail (in theory), as well as enabling many other applications such
as satnav and location finding on online maps. *Why would you want to
degrade our excellent postcode system?

When did I say I wanted to do that? *I basically agreed that the
principle of a county in an address was pointless and that we should
use:-

"20 Anystreet
Anytown AB1 2CD"

as our address format. *Of course, you only *need* "20 AB1 2CD", but
the inclusion of the street and post town provide a useful "checksum"
to ensure the postcode is correct, and the street address probably
assists the postman on his walk as well.

We could feasibly go to "20 Anystreet AB1 2CD" and even remove the
post town, but without any kind of "checksum" I would imagine a lot
more post would end up in the wrong place.

Your first suggestion is already the "correct" postal address
according to the Royal Mail. I think the story was about dropping the
county field from the database, rather than not having to use it.

Deleting anything from databases always seems risky practice to me,
but I suppose it would be archived somehow.

Postal counties to be dropped from the Postcode Address File
 

In message
, at
15:10:49 on Sun, 1 Aug 2010, MIG remarked:
On 1 Aug, 12:57, Roland Perry wrote:
In message
, at
02:49:26 on Sun, 1 Aug 2010, MIG remarked:

I was particularly pleased to see the 'Romford is/is not in Essex'
argument being brought up immediately in the comments.

Having been brought up in the vicinity, I'd say that all of those were
in Essex, as is [ObLRT:] Upminster and Epping.

This change will finally sort out a couple of villages in the south
Chilterns which are physically in Bucks, but with a Henley (Oxon)
address, and a Reading (Berks) Postcode!

"Physically"?

As in... the county boundary on the map.

All these boundaries are administrative for one purpose
or another. *(Although for some reason people seem to think that past
administrative boundaries are "real" and current ones are not.)

I'm not aware that the Bucks/Oxon border has changed very recently, in
that vicinity (other bits of Oxon border have changed in my lifetime).

The objections to the proposed change seem to come from people who
haven't cottoned on that their postal address is not meant to be a
description of where they live,

"Where you live" does have an effect on services provided by the
relevant councils, and hence on one's lifestyle. Planning and Education,
for example, can vary quite dramatically across a country border.

That may be important, but it may not be reasonable to expect the
Royal Mail to provide the means of deducing it, when they have a more
important responsibility to record delivery points so that they can be
reached efficiently from delivery offices and so on.

It matters because of mission-creep of the PAF, encouraged by the PO,
means that *other* organisations are [mis]using the designations that
were designed for efficient postal delivery in other (potentially
damaging) contexts.

And I'm not sure the PAF is a straight mapping of delivery offices and
addresses any more. Did they really switch from sorting (and sourcing
the local delivery of) Foxton's mail in Cambridge, rather than
Stevenage, when they changed it from an SG to CB postcode?

And anyway, I agree that the provision of things like planning and
education (and who you pay local taxes to) are most important in
determining where an address really "is", but that consideration puts
Romford resolutely in the London Borough of Havering, not Essex.

That's true, but I expect that the Post Office would want to leave off
the "London Borough of Havering" line, if that was what appears in the
PAF today.
--
Roland Perry

[OT] Postal counties to be dropped from the Postcode Address File
 

In message , at 22:06:39 on
Sun, 1 Aug 2010, Neil Williams
remarked:
I don't see why the UK postal addresses shouldn't be the same as
Continental ones - i.e. just "number streetname, town postcode". The
street name is itself superfluous in our postcode system, but acts as
a useful "checksum" (as well as making it easier for the postman).

It avoids people having to publish two addresses - one for postal
purposes and a second so that you can find where they are.
--
Roland Perry

[OT] Postal counties to be dropped from the Postcode Address File
 

as our address format. Of course, you only *need* "20 AB1 2CD", but
the inclusion of the street and post town provide a useful "checksum"
to ensure the postcode is correct, and the street address probably
assists the postman on his walk as well.

We could feasibly go to "20 Anystreet AB1 2CD" and even remove the
post town, but without any kind of "checksum" I would imagine a lot
more post would end up in the wrong place.

I think one problem is that the concept of the post town isn't something
that has ever really been effectively communicated to the public at large as
it has always caused confusion when counties have been included in the
address. Presumably it may also not be immediately useful to postal
services other than the Royal Mail who might organise their network
differently. Without looking it up I couldn't actually tell you if the
county in the address file is the county the post town is in, or the county
the address is in, and even then the county can be debatable too. I think
it has always been in the wrong part of the address and that people should
have been encouraged to write addresses something like:

Name
Number Street (or building name etc)
Town (or village or whatever - NOT the post town).
County

BIT TO HELP OUT CARRIER

BIT TO HELP OUT CARRIER would be Post Town and Post Code if using Royal
Mail but could be potentially something completely different for other
carriers. So there is basically an address that the public at large would
understand that would also allow the carrier to deliver accurately if need
be, and a separate bit that is there to help make delivery more efficient.

[OT] Postal counties to be dropped from the Postcode AddressFile
 

Neil Williams wrote on 02 August 2010
07:01:18 ...
On Sun, 01 Aug 2010 23:35:36 +0100, "Richard J."
wrote:

I don't see why the UK postal addresses shouldn't be the same as
Continental ones - i.e. just "number streetname, town postcode".

Because our postcode system has a far finer resolution than most other
countries, and therefore enables greater automation and efficiency in
Royal Mail (in theory), as well as enabling many other applications such
as satnav and location finding on online maps. Why would you want to
degrade our excellent postcode system?

When did I say I wanted to do that? I basically agreed that the
principle of a county in an address was pointless and that we should
use:-

"20 Anystreet
Anytown AB1 2CD"

as our address format.

- which is what the UK recommended format has been for many years. Your
reference to Continental practice and "town postcode" led me to think
that you were advocating one postcode per town as on the Continent
(except the Netherlands).

--
Richard J.
(to email me, swap 'uk' and 'yon' in address)

[OT] Postal counties to be dropped from the Postcode Address File
 

Neil Williams wrote:
When did I say I wanted to do that? I basically agreed that the
principle of a county in an address was pointless and that we should
use:-

"20 Anystreet
Anytown AB1 2CD"

as our address format. Of course, you only *need* "20 AB1 2CD", but
the inclusion of the street and post town provide a useful "checksum"
to ensure the postcode is correct, and the street address probably
assists the postman on his walk as well.

Depends on how much you need the checksum. If you have an address like:

J. Jones
1 Station Road
Newport
smudge

Should that go to Newport (Isle of Wight), Newport (Gwent), Newport
(Telford & Wrekin), Newport (Hants) or Newport (Essex)? How many
places do you have to send the letter around to find if a Mr Jones lives
there?

Yes I know the county names are broken in some of those (that's what Google
gives, which is presumably from the PAF) but that's the PAF's fault for not
keeping up. I suppose Newport, Newport (Newport unitary authority) rather
messes things up. You could always have Newport, Casnewydd instead :)

Theo