On Mon, 09 Feb 2004 17:43:10 GMT, Nigel wrote:
Does anyone know what information the bar-code on the new style Tax
Discs stores and who has access to reading the code.

I got a new tax disc today and I've just scanned the bar code.

It appears to be a type 128 code and has a 14 digit number encoded.
The last 10 digits match the number across the top of the disc. In
my case the first 4 digits are 0905 for a disc that runs out at the
end of Feb next year. 0205 would have seemed more obvious.

David

On Wed, 18 Feb 2004 19:32:45 +0000, David Walters
wrote:


It appears to be a type 128 code and has a 14 digit number encoded.
The last 10 digits match the number across the top of the disc. In
my case the first 4 digits are 0905 for a disc that runs out at the
end of Feb next year. 0205 would have seemed more obvious.


You have to remember that these are the idiots who wasted good money
inventing the new number plate system which pandered to the motor industry.




greg





--
You do a lot less thundering in the pulpit against the Harlot
after she marches right down the aisle and kicks you in the nuts.

"Greg Hennessy" wrote in message
...

You have to remember that these are the idiots who wasted good money
inventing the new number plate system which pandered to the motor
industry.

In what way does it pander to the motor industry? Changing the 'year
identifier' twice a year was brought in with the old single letter
identifier scheme. As I understand it the car industry would much rather not
have a change at set points in the year but rather have a continuous series
and so reduce the peaks and troughs in car sales after and before the
changeover time.

Of course if you're not fussy about when your car was born according to the
number plate you can get a bargain.

Dave

On Wed, 18 Feb 2004 22:37:54 -0000, "Dave Liney" wrote:


You have to remember that these are the idiots who wasted good money
inventing the new number plate system which pandered to the motor
industry.

In what way does it pander to the motor industry? Changing the 'year
identifier' twice a year was brought in with the old single letter
identifier scheme.

Which is exactly what happened with the yearly letter change and then the 6
monthly nonsense which resulted from the august sales glut.

It was originally meant to turnover on the 1st of Jan.


As I understand it the car industry would much rather not
have a change at set points in the year but rather have a continuous series
and so reduce the peaks and troughs in car sales after and before the
changeover time.

Pardon my french, but F*ck the car industry. Other countries manage just
fine without changing a year identifier every 6 months.

IIRC in switzerland the plate is handed out for life.

In 7-8 characters, they could have easily encoded registration information
using Base36 and not have of the 4/7ths redundancy on each and every plate.


Of course if you're not fussy about when your car was born according to the
number plate you can get a bargain.

Quite. Taking a 10-15% loss on something driven new out the showroom door
is the height of stupidity.



greg
--
You do a lot less thundering in the pulpit against the Harlot
after she marches right down the aisle and kicks you in the nuts.

"Greg Hennessy" wrote in message
...

In 7-8 characters, they could have easily encoded registration
information
using Base36 and not have of the 4/7ths redundancy on each and every
plate.

What's your problem with the redundancy? Isn't some of it needed anyway
to enable the old numbering systems to coexist with the new one?
--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)

On Thu, 19 Feb 2004 01:40:41 GMT, "Richard J."
wrote:


"Greg Hennessy" wrote in message
.. .

In 7-8 characters, they could have easily encoded registration
information
using Base36 and not have of the 4/7ths redundancy on each and every
plate.

What's your problem with the redundancy?

Its a horse designed by a committee.


Isn't some of it needed anyway
to enable the old numbering systems to coexist with the new one?

Taking up nearly 60% of each and every plate issued is bad design IMHO.

Some is needed if one is going to encode the year and location of
registration.

Personally I consider the issue of yearly plates to be silly.

Giving each license holder his own plate for life would have solved the
problem once and for all.



greg




--
You do a lot less thundering in the pulpit against the Harlot
after she marches right down the aisle and kicks you in the nuts.

Greg Hennessy wrote:
On Thu, 19 Feb 2004 01:40:41 GMT, "Richard J."
wrote:


"Greg Hennessy" wrote in message
...

In 7-8 characters, they could have easily encoded registration
information using Base36 and not have of the 4/7ths redundancy on
each and every plate.

What's your problem with the redundancy?

Its a horse designed by a committee.

That's not an answer to my question.

Isn't some of it needed anyway
to enable the old numbering systems to coexist with the new one?

Taking up nearly 60% of each and every plate issued is bad design
IMHO.

You're implying that it needs only 3 characters to identify the vehicle.
That's a maximum of 46,656 using all letters and digits. I think we
have rather more vehicles than that on the roads.

Some is needed if one is going to encode the year and location of
registration.

Personally I consider the issue of yearly plates to be silly.

Giving each license holder his own plate for life would have solved
the problem once and for all.

What is this "problem" that you are so concerned about?
--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)

Greg Hennessy wrote in message . ..
Personally I consider the issue of yearly plates to be silly.

Personally I quite like it. Its a quick rough indication of a cars
age when you're buying 2nd hand. Ok the plates could be faked but thats a
whole other issue.


Giving each license holder his own plate for life would have solved the
problem once and for all.

No thanks. I don't want a plate that will identify me personally. I carry
enough id as it is and don't need yet more big brother survellance on top
of it.

B2003

In article ,
(Richard J.) wrote:

"Greg Hennessy" wrote in message
...

In 7-8 characters, they could have easily encoded registration
information using Base36 and not have of the 4/7ths redundancy on each
and every plate.

What's your problem with the redundancy? Isn't some of it needed anyway
to enable the old numbering systems to coexist with the new one?

Redundancy is also inherent in the regional identification coding.

What amuses me is the new concept of "uncherished" numbers introduced by
the new system.

Have you noticed how high a proportion of the plates that have "X" or "Z"
(or both) in the three-letter group, presumably because the DVLA can't
sell most of them?

--
Colin Rosenstiel

In article ,
Colin Rosenstiel writes
Have you noticed how high a proportion of the plates that have "X" or "Z"
(or both) in the three-letter group, presumably because the DVLA can't
sell most of them?

There are 13824 three-letter groups available. 3176 (23%) contain an X
or a Z. That roughly matches my perception of their frequency; have you
done a census?

--
Clive D.W. Feather, writing for himself | Home:
Tel: +44 20 8495 6138 (work) | Web: http://www.davros.org
Fax: +44 870 051 9937 | Work:
Written on my laptop; please observe the Reply-To address