Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Re: Decipher of fluorescent barcodes found on postcards
813 views
Skip to first unread message
Message has been deleted
dbriggs
Aug 17, 2012, 9:29:40 AM8/17/12
to
joepaw wrote:
> Can anyone assist me in identifying the information contained in these fluorescent barcodes found on postcards mailed into US from abroad?
>
> #1 https://dl.dropbox.com/u/5179683/062812-1994%20postcard%20code%20crop.JPG
>
> #2 https://dl.dropbox.com/u/5179683/080111-1989%20postcard%20code%20crop.jpg
>
> It is my understanding that this code may be associated with the inability to decipher the address automatically which then captures an image of the address and applies this code to assign the image to the physical piece of mail. What I am looking for is machine location, date stamp, time stamp, etc.
>
> Thanks in advance for any assistance you are able to provide.
let me start by saying I didn't click on your links for what should be
obvious reasons.
If you're talking about orange barcodes on the back of a mailpiece
(non-address side), those are affixed by US sorting machines. they are
issued to a piece with a internal (USPS) # which temporarily (forget how
long; 10-30 days)links it to the address on the front. the address on
the front is either read automagically, by an optical character reader,
or a picture of the front is taken, sent by satellite to a remote
encoding center, read by a human, then the address linked to that
barcode & sent back. (sorry for the run-on sentence)
then any sorting machine in the country can read the orange barcode and
know the address to send it to. that's how it's "supposed" to work; YRMV
> Can anyone assist me in identifying the information contained in these fluorescent barcodes found on postcards mailed into US from abroad?
>
> #1 https://dl.dropbox.com/u/5179683/062812-1994%20postcard%20code%20crop.JPG
>
> #2 https://dl.dropbox.com/u/5179683/080111-1989%20postcard%20code%20crop.jpg
>
> It is my understanding that this code may be associated with the inability to decipher the address automatically which then captures an image of the address and applies this code to assign the image to the physical piece of mail. What I am looking for is machine location, date stamp, time stamp, etc.
>
> Thanks in advance for any assistance you are able to provide.
let me start by saying I didn't click on your links for what should be
obvious reasons.
If you're talking about orange barcodes on the back of a mailpiece
(non-address side), those are affixed by US sorting machines. they are
issued to a piece with a internal (USPS) # which temporarily (forget how
long; 10-30 days)links it to the address on the front. the address on
the front is either read automagically, by an optical character reader,
or a picture of the front is taken, sent by satellite to a remote
encoding center, read by a human, then the address linked to that
barcode & sent back. (sorry for the run-on sentence)
then any sorting machine in the country can read the orange barcode and
know the address to send it to. that's how it's "supposed" to work; YRMV
Adam H. Kerman
Aug 17, 2012, 11:29:01 AM8/17/12
to
absolutely positively had to be unique network-wide, that a combination
of date stamp and machine number would be the way to do it. It would
have to be the machine, or the camera lens, that took the image, not
machines the piece was routed through after barcodes were applied.
dbriggs
Aug 17, 2012, 11:40:39 AM8/17/12
to
facer/canceler if it's an original piece. he seemed to be speaking of a
piece from out-of-country, in which case the first sorting machine it
would come into contact with would either apply it, if it had that
capability, or rerouted to one that did
Adam H. Kerman
Aug 17, 2012, 3:19:42 PM8/17/12
to
in the post office sorting system that spray on bar codes according to
instructions from remote encoding. They must never be re-used. The easiest
way to do that is to create a number from a date stamp and machine number.
YOu'd probably include a sequence number and a definitely a check digit.
>the barcode is applied by the facer/canceler if it's an original piece.
back through the sorting process?
>he seemed to be speaking of a piece from out-of-country, in which case
>the first sorting machine it would come into contact with would either
>apply it, if it had that capability, or rerouted to one that did
captured for remote encoding, though.
Canadian barcodes are fluorescent, but I don't know if they look like ours.
Is this because they don't use phosphor or fluorescent tags in stamps and
postage meter indicia and it's used to orient the mail?
dbriggs
Aug 17, 2012, 4:40:07 PM8/17/12
to
maybe a tech knows. AFAIK, those #s were temporary; time-limited. so
possibly they could be used again. I never knew how to read them w/naked eye
>
>> the barcode is applied by the facer/canceler if it's an original piece.
>
> That makes sense. What's an original piece, a letter that hasn't looped
> back through the sorting process?
original piece=new piece; from the street or BMEU
>> the barcode is applied by the facer/canceler if it's an original piece.
>
> That makes sense. What's an original piece, a letter that hasn't looped
> back through the sorting process?
>
>> he seemed to be speaking of a piece from out-of-country, in which case
>> the first sorting machine it would come into contact with would either
>> apply it, if it had that capability, or rerouted to one that did
>
> He seemed to know that it was a serial number of the image of the address
> captured for remote encoding, though.
>
> Canadian barcodes are fluorescent, but I don't know if they look like ours.
> Is this because they don't use phosphor or fluorescent tags in stamps and
> postage meter indicia and it's used to orient the mail?
again, above my scope of knowledge (and now that I'm gone, pretty much
>> he seemed to be speaking of a piece from out-of-country, in which case
>> the first sorting machine it would come into contact with would either
>> apply it, if it had that capability, or rerouted to one that did
>
> He seemed to know that it was a serial number of the image of the address
> captured for remote encoding, though.
>
> Canadian barcodes are fluorescent, but I don't know if they look like ours.
> Is this because they don't use phosphor or fluorescent tags in stamps and
> postage meter indicia and it's used to orient the mail?
above my level of GAS - heh)
joepaw
Sep 19, 2012, 9:03:34 AM9/19/12
to
Richard Hackwith
Sep 23, 2012, 2:34:39 AM9/23/12
to
joepaw <joes...@gmail.com> wrote in
news:0b0a97e8-4383-4bf4...@googlegroups.com:
>
> So does this mean that the barcode does not provide information on
> where is was applied ? and only provides address info ? I'm confused.
> If you decipher the barcode, what does it tell you?
>
It just identifies that piece of mail and matches it to an entry in the
data base that has the info for that piece of mail. There might be a
location in the data base for that entry, but it is not in the barcode.
news:0b0a97e8-4383-4bf4...@googlegroups.com:
>
> So does this mean that the barcode does not provide information on
> where is was applied ? and only provides address info ? I'm confused.
> If you decipher the barcode, what does it tell you?
>
data base that has the info for that piece of mail. There might be a
location in the data base for that entry, but it is not in the barcode.
Adam H. Kerman
Sep 23, 2012, 8:11:23 AM9/23/12
to
Richard Hackwith <r...@remove.winfirst.com> wrote:
>joepaw <joes...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>So does this mean that the barcode does not provide information on
>>where is was applied ? and only provides address info ? I'm confused.
>>If you decipher the barcode, what does it tell you?
>It just identifies that piece of mail and matches it to an entry in the
>data base that has the info for that piece of mail. There might be a
>location in the data base for that entry, but it is not in the barcode.
Then how are the ID numbers kept unique universe wide?
>>So does this mean that the barcode does not provide information on
>>where is was applied ? and only provides address info ? I'm confused.
>>If you decipher the barcode, what does it tell you?
>It just identifies that piece of mail and matches it to an entry in the
>data base that has the info for that piece of mail. There might be a
>location in the data base for that entry, but it is not in the barcode.
Message has been deleted
Adam H. Kerman
Sep 26, 2012, 4:56:59 PM9/26/12
to
Former ET <nom...@none.invalid> wrote:
>Some clarification is desperately needed in this thread ;-)
>First off, to avoid confusion ALWAYS refer to the orange barcode on the
>back of the mail piece as the 'ID tag' and the black bar code on the
>front as the 'Postnet barcode' (or, I guess now the 'Universal barcode',
>something I know very little about as I've been retired for several
>years). Never simply say "the barcode".
>From: http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview/id/475442.html
>_________________________________________________________________________
>The ID tag (image record descriptor) is made of the following information.
>Machine ISS number - 4 digit # that relates to the image lift equipment
>and plant
>Mailpiece # - 1 to 24999
>Time stamp - in 1/2 hour increments
>Date
>and lastly, mail class
>_________________________________________________________________________
That makes a great deal of sense. I knew there had to be a time stamp in
there. I'm a little surprised that four digits are required for the
machine number.
Thanks for digging that up.
>The assigned 'ISS number' will stay with this machine for its entire life.
>Only those machines that spray an ID tag are assigned an ISS number: AFCS,
>DIOSS, CIOSS, and the obsolete MLOCR (I don't know about the various flat
>sorting machines they have now)
Interesting. MLOCRs still exist in mailing houses. What machine replaced it
in the post office plant environment?
>Many years ago (late '90s ?) there was an incident . . .
Funny story, thanks.
>First off, to avoid confusion ALWAYS refer to the orange barcode on the
>back of the mail piece as the 'ID tag' and the black bar code on the
>front as the 'Postnet barcode' (or, I guess now the 'Universal barcode',
>something I know very little about as I've been retired for several
>years). Never simply say "the barcode".
>From: http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview/id/475442.html
>_________________________________________________________________________
>The ID tag (image record descriptor) is made of the following information.
>Machine ISS number - 4 digit # that relates to the image lift equipment
>and plant
>Mailpiece # - 1 to 24999
>Time stamp - in 1/2 hour increments
>Date
>and lastly, mail class
>_________________________________________________________________________
That makes a great deal of sense. I knew there had to be a time stamp in
there. I'm a little surprised that four digits are required for the
machine number.
Thanks for digging that up.
>The assigned 'ISS number' will stay with this machine for its entire life.
>Only those machines that spray an ID tag are assigned an ISS number: AFCS,
>DIOSS, CIOSS, and the obsolete MLOCR (I don't know about the various flat
>sorting machines they have now)
Interesting. MLOCRs still exist in mailing houses. What machine replaced it
in the post office plant environment?
>Many years ago (late '90s ?) there was an incident . . .
Funny story, thanks.
Message has been deleted
Adam H. Kerman
Sep 27, 2012, 2:01:35 PM9/27/12
to
>was being formulated back in the mid '90s, the internet was in its infancy
>and the PO's mail volume was consistantly growing yearly. Engineering
>planers had the forsight to envision a time when they would need at
>least 1000 unique 'serial numbers' to identify each individual 'image
>lift capable machine' to cover all 50 states and Puerto Rico.
10000, not 1000
>>Thanks for digging that up.
>>>The assigned 'ISS number' will stay with this machine for its entire life.
>>>Only those machines that spray an ID tag are assigned an ISS number: AFCS,
>>>DIOSS, CIOSS, and the obsolete MLOCR (I don't know about the various flat
>>>sorting machines they have now)
>>Interesting. MLOCRs still exist in mailing houses. What machine replaced it
>>in the post office plant environment?
>Here's a marketing video by Siemens targeted at the private sector and/or
>other country's postal systems that looks exactly like the newer model
>DIOSS at the PO.
>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vxtkYBN5kJg
Thanks. I'll look at it later.
I really appreciate the followups. Very interesting.
0 new messages