|
[OT] Postal counties to be dropped from the Postcode Address File
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? tom -- made up languages, delusions, skin diseases and unaided human flight |
[OT] Postal counties to be dropped from the Postcode AddressFile
Tom Anderson wrote on 31 July 2010 19:07:34 ...
Evening all, Not related to transport, but a topic which flares up here now and then: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-10825499 Oh, good. Perhaps it will finally persuade websites not to insist on a county, which I find quite irritating when I've already given London as the town/city name. 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? The Met doesn't have any stations in Kent. -- Richard J. (to email me, swap 'uk' and 'yon' in address) |
[OT] Postal counties to be dropped from the Postcode Address File
In message . li, at
19:07:34 on Sat, 31 Jul 2010, Tom Anderson 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! -- Roland Perry |
Postal counties to be dropped from the Postcode Address File
On 1 Aug, 09:35, Roland Perry wrote:
In message . li, at 19:07:34 on Sat, 31 Jul 2010, Tom Anderson 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! -- Roland Perry "Physically"? 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.) 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, but is a structured entry in a record of delivery points. It can have whatever fields in it the owner of the record wants to store. |
[OT] Postal counties to be dropped from the Postcode Address File
On Sun, 01 Aug 2010 01:01:37 +0100, "Richard J."
wrote: Tom Anderson wrote on 31 July 2010 19:07:34 ... Evening all, Not related to transport, but a topic which flares up here now and then: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-10825499 Oh, good. Perhaps it will finally persuade websites not to insist on a county, which I find quite irritating when I've already given London as the town/city name. One possible problem is that some debit/credit card issuers still insist on a county as part of their security requirements for online payments. Some, not all. |
Postal counties to be dropped from the Postcode Address File
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. but is a structured entry in a record of delivery points. It can have whatever fields in it the owner of the record wants to store. Addresses, however, come with lots of baggage. I once lived in a village several miles inside south Cambridgeshire. But the postcode was associated with Royston "Herts". As a result many providers of services would insist it was their (eg) Stevenage branch which I should be talking to, not the one much nearer (demographically as well as physically) in Cambridge. The worst was online estate agents, who in effect created a no-mans land of houses that would not show up in a search when people expected results from the southern fringe of Cambridge, but were also way outside the area that anyone looking for a house in Stevenage would be interested in. -- Roland Perry |
Postal counties to be dropped from the Postcode Address File
On 2010-08-01 12:57:35 +0100, Roland Perry said:
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. but is a structured entry in a record of delivery points. It can have whatever fields in it the owner of the record wants to store. Addresses, however, come with lots of baggage. I once lived in a village several miles inside south Cambridgeshire. But the postcode was associated with Royston "Herts". As a result many providers of services would insist it was their (eg) Stevenage branch which I should be talking to, not the one much nearer (demographically as well as physically) in Cambridge. The worst was online estate agents, who in effect created a no-mans land of houses that would not show up in a search when people expected results from the southern fringe of Cambridge, but were also way outside the area that anyone looking for a house in Stevenage would be interested in. The whole thing's a mess, due as others have hinted to people taking the Royal Mail's version of the postal address as being incontrovertible evidence as to the administrative area. This has a whole raft of unintended consequences. There was a very vigorous campaign in the local press a while back from the village of Eastwick, just north of Harlow. They wanted their address changed from Harlow, Essex to a Herts one as they seemed to think that they were too good for a Harlow address. The Royal Mail would have none of it. I live in the converse: an Essex village with a Herts. address. I'm happy with that, but the residents of East Herts. should be concerned that their council tax pays for me to get East herts propoganda sheets shoved through my door from time to time, although that may be postcode rather than postal address related. But the big problem is organisations that arrange services geographically, as others have said. I've lost count of the times I've had to explain "Yes, my address DOES say Bishop's Stortford, Herts. But no, I live in Essex". It's even been a problem with the police, although I hope modern technology has improved matters in that particular case. The real problem is the clueless nature of some organisations and their systems. Will things really get better once we get in the habit of not adding the county to addresses? I suspect they'll use postcodes instead. With sufficient granularity that could be fine. OTOH it could easily be a huge mess. |
Postal counties to be dropped from the Postcode Address File
|
Postal counties to be dropped from the Postcode Address File
In message , at 13:44:05 on Sun,
1 Aug 2010, Trolleybus remarked: The real problem is the clueless nature of some organisations and their systems. Will things really get better once we get in the habit of not adding the county to addresses? I suspect they'll use postcodes instead. With sufficient granularity that could be fine. OTOH it could easily be a huge mess. It wouldn't have helped me (with an SG8 postcode several miles inside Cambridgeshire) unless they are prepared to go down to at least that level of granularity. Which would also require some central 'body of knowledge' that said "SG8 is a village on the southern fringe of Cambridge, not anywhere near, or remotely associated with, Stevenage". The next village north (Foxton), also famous for being the faux-destination of stopping trains from Kings Cross to Cambridge, did mount a campaign and was eventually re-designated CB22 about ten years ago. -- Roland Perry |
Postal counties to be dropped from the Postcode Address File
|
[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 |
Postal counties to be dropped from the Postcode Address File
MIG wrote:
Deleting anything from databases always seems risky practice to me, but I suppose it would be archived somehow. True but in this case they have multiple counties in the database to handle the various changes over the years (and even list some unitary authorities as "counties") and it's probable that the regular shake-ups of local government are creaing so many variants that it's getting too much for the system. Having to field endless complaints about people being in the "wrong" county can't help either. |
Postal counties to be dropped from the Postcode Address File
In message , at 15:20:46 on Mon, 2 Aug
2010, Tim Roll-Pickering remarked: Having to field endless complaints about people being in the "wrong" county can't help either. That's a self-inflicted injury because of the way they encourage other (non-Post Office) people to use the database as a way of defining the hinterland of where people live. As a result, it has a huge number of false positives and negatives, and simply deleting some of the database it not necessarily going to help very much. -- Roland Perry |
[OT] Postal counties to be dropped from the Postcode AddressFile
On 2010\08\02 11:30, Theo Markettos wrote:
Neil 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? Since you're the post office, and you delivered the mail yesterday and the day before, you should know which Station Road has a Mr Jones in it, i.e. the person's name is a checksum. |
[OT] Postal counties to be dropped from the Postcode Address File
Basil Jet wrote:
On 2010\08\02 11:30, Theo Markettos wrote: 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? Since you're the post office, and you delivered the mail yesterday and the day before, you should know which Station Road has a Mr Jones in it, i.e. the person's name is a checksum. Indeed. But do you ring up the delivery offices in each of those places and try to get through to the postie who happens to do that round? Or do you play (literal!) pass-the-parcel around all the various possible sorting offices until you find one who recognise the name? Which could take weeks (for example, if a postie was on holiday). Theo |
[OT] Postal counties to be dropped from the Postcode AddressFile
Theo Markettos wrote on 02 August
2010 11:30:27 ... Neil 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? Juat Telford & Wrekin. Newport (Gwent) doesn't have a Station Road in Newport itself. There are several Station Roads in the area, but the secondary locations are needed in the address, e.g. Crumlin, NEWPORT. Similarly for Newport (Isle of Wight). Newport (Hants) appears to be another way of referring to Newport (IoW). Newport (Essex) is Newport, SAFFRON WALDEN. So it has to be TF10 7EW. -- Richard J. (to email me, swap 'uk' and 'yon' in address) |
[OT] Postal counties to be dropped from the Postcode Address File
On Mon, 2 Aug 2010 08:54:50 +0100, Roland Perry
wrote: It avoids people having to publish two addresses - one for postal purposes and a second so that you can find where they are. Don't know about you, but these days I find out where someone is by typing their postcode into Google Maps or my sat-nav. Neil -- Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK To reply put my first name before the at. |
[OT] Postal counties to be dropped from the Postcode Address File
In message , at 20:35:44 on
Mon, 2 Aug 2010, Neil Williams remarked: It avoids people having to publish two addresses - one for postal purposes and a second so that you can find where they are. Don't know about you, but these days I find out where someone is by typing their postcode into Google Maps or my sat-nav. Ad you think that would still work if we had a two-tier (continental style) address model in the UK? -- Roland Perry |
[OT] Postal counties to be dropped from the Postcode Address File
On Mon, 2 Aug 2010 21:08:39 +0100, Roland Perry
wrote: Ad you think that would still work if we had a two-tier (continental style) address model in the UK? I don't know when I suggested that. All I suggested was that the counties are irrelevant. Google Maps etc don't locate a postcode by what county it is in. They have a database mapping postcodes to longitude/latitude. Neil -- Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK To reply put my first name before the at. |
[OT] Postal counties to be dropped from the Postcode Address File
In message , at 21:17:03 on
Mon, 2 Aug 2010, Neil Williams remarked: Ad you think that would still work if we had a two-tier (continental style) address model in the UK? I don't know when I suggested that. You suggested a continental model last night. -- Roland Perry |
[OT] Postal counties to be dropped from the Postcode Address File
On Mon, 2 Aug 2010 21:26:17 +0100, Roland Perry
wrote: In message , at 21:17:03 on Mon, 2 Aug 2010, Neil Williams remarked: Ad you think that would still work if we had a two-tier (continental style) address model in the UK? I don't know when I suggested that. You suggested a continental model last night. I didn't. I suggested that the only data required to form an address would be as per the Continental system, i.e.:- 10 Anystreet Anytown AB1 2CD ....in which the street and town act as effectively checksums and to help the postman (actually only "10 AB1 2CD" is theoretically enough, but then there is no "checksum"). There is no need for district of the town nor for county, as the postcode will provide that information, and duplicate street names in a given town aren't that common. I tend to use that sort of format anyway, and haven't found it a problem. I did not at any point suggest that our postcode system should be reduced in scope to one of lower resolution such as that found in other countries. Neil -- Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK To reply put my first name before the at. |
[OT] Postal counties to be dropped from the Postcode AddressFile
On 2010\08\02 18:02, Theo Markettos wrote:
Basil wrote: On 2010\08\02 11:30, Theo Markettos wrote: 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? Since you're the post office, and you delivered the mail yesterday and the day before, you should know which Station Road has a Mr Jones in it, i.e. the person's name is a checksum. Indeed. But do you ring up the delivery offices in each of those places and try to get through to the postie who happens to do that round? Or do you play (literal!) pass-the-parcel around all the various possible sorting offices until you find one who recognise the name? Which could take weeks (for example, if a postie was on holiday). No, the scanner that currently does OCR on the postcode of every letter would also do OCR on the text that precedes the postcode and store every combination to allow subsequent comparison on letters where the postcode is unreadable. |
[OT] Postal counties to be dropped from the Postcode AddressFile
On Sun, 1 Aug 2010, Roland Perry wrote:
In message . li, at 19:07:34 on Sat, 31 Jul 2010, Tom Anderson 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. Whereas having been brought up in Essex, i'd say they were in London! tom -- What we learn about is not nature itself, but nature exposed to our methods of questioning. -- Werner Heisenberg |
[OT] Postal counties to be dropped from the Postcode Address File
"Roland Perry" wrote in message
... In message , at 20:35:44 on Mon, 2 Aug 2010, Neil Williams remarked: It avoids people having to publish two addresses - one for postal purposes and a second so that you can find where they are. Don't know about you, but these days I find out where someone is by typing their postcode into Google Maps or my sat-nav. Ad you think that would still work if we had a two-tier (continental style) address model in the UK? -- Roland Perry It certainly works with an address where I used to live in New York - you can try it out for yourself because I've given the address below. The Royal Mail seem to be trying to move this way, although they're not doing a very good job of educating the Great British Public. I would be strongly in favour of a system that is more highly mechanised (and much cheaper) such as the USA has. All US addresses follow the format Street address City, StateZip The Street address contains the building name or number, the street name and an optional apartment/room number, in that order. So my address was 377 Rector Place Apt #5A NEW YORK, NY10280-1534 If you don't follow the above format your mail probably won't be delivered at all or, at the very best, takes a long time to reach its destination. The first five digits of the zip code identify the local mail delivery office, the next four digits (which are optional) identify a group of around 15 delivery points. Google maps doesn't handle the extended zip code, but it gets near enough. -- DAS |
[OT] Postal counties to be dropped from the Postcode Address
|
[OT] Postal counties to be dropped from the Postcode Address File
|
Postal counties to be dropped from the Postcode Address File
On 3 Aug, 00:35, wrote:
In article , (Neil Williams) wrote: On Mon, 2 Aug 2010 08:54:50 +0100, Roland Perry wrote: It avoids people having to publish two addresses - one for postal purposes and a second so that you can find where they are. Don't know about you, but these days I find out where someone is by typing their postcode into Google Maps or my sat-nav. I can think of some addresses where you could be some distance from your intended destination. Try Trinity College, Cambridge CB2 1TQ. Postcodes define points for deliver of mail, not a large sprawl of buildings covering a large chunk of central Cambridge. -- Colin Rosenstiel It would be handy if Google Maps indicated when it was guessing wildly with a new development rather than just stick the arrow somewhere. Some of their results are so wild that I can't believe it's actually a database entry at all, but more likely pulling back one level to somewhere in the area covered by the first half of the postcode. |
[OT] Postal counties to be dropped from the Postcode Address File
In message , at 00:30:21 on Tue, 3 Aug
2010, David A Stocks remarked: 377 Rector Place Apt #5A NEW YORK, NY10280-1534 If you don't follow the above format your mail probably won't be delivered at all or, at the very best, takes a long time to reach its destination. The first five digits of the zip code identify the local mail delivery office, the next four digits (which are optional) identify a group of around 15 delivery points. Google maps doesn't handle the extended zip code, but it gets near enough. I lived in Atlanta for a year, and the five-digit part of the postcode was all that anyone used. Unfortunately for geo-location purposes it covered a rather large area. Indeed, despite being in the suburbs (and not even the outer suburbs) the nearest Post Office (which was also the district sorting and delivery office) was a 20 minute drive away! -- Roland Perry |
[OT] Postal counties to be dropped from the Postcode Address File
In message , at 18:35:57
on Mon, 2 Aug 2010, remarked: Try Trinity College, Cambridge CB2 1TQ. Postcodes define points for deliver of mail, not a large sprawl of buildings covering a large chunk of central Cambridge. When I was in Cambridge, I used a very short address that worked every time. (Sidney Sussex, Cambridge). I've never had the opportunity to have such a short address again. -- Roland Perry |
[OT] Postal counties to be dropped from the Postcode Address File
In message . li, at
00:21:04 on Tue, 3 Aug 2010, Tom Anderson 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. Whereas having been brought up in Essex, i'd say they were in London! Brentwood is an interesting case (I lived there for a while). People "from London" used to regard it as the "first market town out in the countryside of Essex". (Although strictly it didn't have a market, but people used to go there for a "day/evening out in the country"). Whereas people who lived in the real countryside (eg in Chelmsford or Billericay) used to regard it as "the first town that's inside Greater London metro area". -- Roland Perry |
[OT] Postal counties to be dropped from the Postcode Address File
On Mon, Aug 02, 2010 at 09:08:39PM +0100, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 20:35:44 on Mon, 2 Aug 2010, Neil Williams remarked: Don't know about you, but these days I find out where someone is by typing their postcode into Google Maps or my sat-nav. Ad you think that would still work if we had a two-tier (continental style) address model in the UK? Of course it would, given that it works in the rest of Europe. Sure, you don't type in the postcode, but Tomtom on my phone knows *exactly* where to find most of my continental friends. eg ... hit "Navigate to", "Address", select Germany from the list of countries, type five letters to find the town, type three letters to find the street, it then asks me for the house number and directs me right to their front door. This is actually quicker than, in the UK, typing in the entire postcode (with irritating switches between letters and numbers) and the house number. -- David Cantrell | top google result for "internet beard fetish club" Deck of Cards: $1.29. "101 Solitaire Variations" book: $6.59. Cheap replacement for the one thing Windows is good at: priceless -- Shane Lazarus |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 07:45 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk