Personally I really hope something like https://plus.codes/ will catch up. People should be easily able to provide address without knowing or caring about local arrangements.
Who needs some proprietary system (there’s also a so-called “three word” competing system). Just use lat/long which are universal.
> People should be easily able to provide address without knowing or caring about local arrangements.
What can be more “local” than an address and why should it be subject to outside specification?
If you consider lat/long user-unfriendly then just stuff them into URIs of some sort — URLs would work — and keep this em in a sort of DNS. Then people could name their addresses whatever they want.
This is a pretty strange statement. Ad address, in my interpretation, is an identifier that can be given to anyone without local contextual knowledge to find a place of interest. You can tell me in my hometown that the cafe is opposite of the hardware store and I'll find it precisely because I know where the hardware store is. In other towns/places, as an outsider, I would need an address to be able to find something.
But regrettably that's not the case. So I'm hoping that SOMETHING will catch on eventually.
Your age is even more local. I'd say even personal. Still all others could use objective sense of what a year is and how many of those ago you were born. That's why we need outside specification for local things. Because local doesn't mean isolated from the rest of humanity.
Just use lat/long which are universal.
LatxLng Apt 23C
Also, when sorting mail looking up lat-long for every item is tedious, so we could name the address by the town/city name that it is local too.
Now lat-long is getting to be redundant ...
Plus Codes are open source and there are no licensing fees. They also compare different location encoding systems like Lat-Long etc.
https://github.com/google/open-location-code/wiki/Evaluation...
Surely its the exact opposite. Locals don't need an address, they know what you mean when you say "the yellow house behind where the pharmacy used to be". "Outsiders" are the target users for addresses and thus it should be optimized for their understanding and use cases.
Not many people know that the x.400 email standard allowed for physical delivery options in the spec
The Japanese Quasi-Zenith Satellite System (QZSS) is designed specifically to work around this problem, but that level of precision isn't available everywhere yet.
For instance, https://planner.myrouteonline.com/route-planner/1752/#, works perfectly in Hilgermissen and has no trouble finding the houses and finding the optimal route.
There is in fact not a problem to be solved, except perhaps between the ears of the people managing delivery companies.
It would already be a better solution indeed. But ultimately I would prefer to have a kind of unique identifier for my person that is not based on my location nor my name, like for instance A23C-B442-9F72. It could then be associated to a first name, last name, and geographical address in a database. Delivery services can then look-up the geographical address and your name at delivery time to find you or your mailbox.
This would avoid so much troubles for stuff like:
- Moving: I can change my address in one place and everything will be delivered to the new place, no needs for thousands of calls and letters to companies to update every subscription.
- Changing name: Whenever someone is changing his name for any reason (weeding, gender change, etc.) it should only be modified in one place.
- Disposable address: It should be possible to get disposable identifiers that can only be read by delivery services for hiding your real identifier/address from suspicious website
Of course this system is not perfect and probably has drawbacks, but it would be already a step in the good direction for me. Implementation details are left open for discussion (Centralized vs distributed database(s), checksum for spelling mistakes, financial repercussions, etc.)
That's up to the locals. They have the right to insist you should care first about local arrangements before interacting with them.
I could understand it if the existing system were broken, but it doesn't seem to be. From what I can read, it seems to work, presumably people do get their mail and packages.
Or work around local arrangements using lat/long or plus codes or whatever naming scheme delivery companies will choose to use for your town...
Democracy (or any form of government) wouldn't last long if you couldn't work around regulations.
People have a right to share true information legitimately acquired without the constraints of governments or mobs in other jurisdictions.
Locals can't prevent foreigners from giving directions to their library or the best restaurant. Those are just facts of the world. Visitors are welcome to go discover a town then leave and tell their friends about it.
Then an addressing system is just a shorthand for that locational information. It's just a hash function or a lookup table. No one has a right to prevent others from using data structures to organize their thoughts.
All rights granted to some impose negative obligations on others. Those implied negative obligations should not conflict with other rights. Rights should promote the healthy functioning of society. Also, rights should promote freedom more than restriction.
A right to prevent others from discussing addresses without permission of locals conflicts with other rights, doesn't promote the healthy functioning of society, and creates far more restrictions than freedoms. I don't think it's a good right.
Happens not so often. But it does happen that the coordinates of a building don't stay fixed: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Structure_relocation
If you want something attached to your identity not your location, that's what names are for. Just don't be surprised people can't find where you are if you give them your name instead of location.
I say "western methods" because there are some exceptions to this rule is countries with high numbers of nomadic tribes.
House numbering logic wildly differs between countries. In Tokyo, houses are numbered in the order in which they are constructed. I would expect a moved house therefore to keep its number.
London (or even the UK as a whole?) also has a rather random assignment of house numbers even though the natives will claim its completely logical.
Isn't that the case for most countries?
> I would expect a moved house therefore to keep its number.
Do you have any reason for this expectation? I ask because your comment here sounds very speculative judging by the way it has been written.
> London (or even the UK as a whole?) also has a rather random assignment of house numbers even though the natives will claim its completely logical.
It's only random where houses haven't been built sequentially down the road. Much like the Tokyo example you gave.
In any case, you're addressing the point about house numbers where as I was discussing postal codes. The two differ. House numbers are an exact designation for your property; be it a house, flat, or even mobile home on a plot of land. Post codes (zip codes, etc) are a region of land which would typically serve a cluster of homes. While you code move a property and decide to keep the same house name (though it would be massively confusing if you kept the same house number if you moved it to another street - so I suspect some authority or other would step in and say you cannot do that), you cannot keep the same post code.
To use a comparison, it's a bit like moving your house out of London and into Tokyo but still putting London, England on your addresses and expecting post to get delivered to the right place. While you can move your house, you cannot move London nor England with it. And the same is true for postal / zip codes - in fact more so because you can in theory put garbage down as your address just so long as you get the house number/name and the post code right.
>Isn't that the case for most countries?
I don't think so.. as far as I can (subjectively) tell, it's more common to set up a logical system. Another poster mentioned the Finnish system, where the number reflects the physical distance from the start of the road (123 = 1230 meters). Another common scheme is to use even numbers on one side of the road, and odd numbers on the other side, and numbering the houses sequentially, leaving gaps for not-yet built houses. In my street, for example, there's a large gap in the numbering because the next building is nearly a hundred meters away. On the occasional 'two buildings squeezed into one spot' just add A and B (and C and so on) as needed. And around here the numbering always start from the most southern part of the road or street (and if you ask "what about roads going exactly east-west", then a) I don't know, and b) It's really hard to find a roading that goes exactly east-west. I suspect, however, that there's a system for that as well - "if in doubt, start from east" or something).
That's what we do in the UK as well (barring the gaps in the numbering) but for the most part it still ends up following the logic of "houses numbered in the order in which they are constructed" because you either need to know that there should be a gap (in which case the estimated build date is close enough to the rest of the street's build that you might as well consider it one lump development) or else you end up with letter suffixes or unordered numbering (which is what often ends up in the UK as roads get further developed decades after they were first built).
Ultimately though, there is no law in the UK about how houses should be numbered so as much as there are conventions, it's up to the housing development to apply them. However might differ in other countries which might have stricter legislation about naming houses?
Regarding the south->north scheme, I'd be interested to know what the streets are like in places that follow that convention. In the UK our roads are like a big bowl of spaghetti with even new builds wiggling around and even looping back on themselves (the road I live on is crescent-shaped). But where you have straighter roads, I could imagine a numbering scheme based on the direction of the road might work pretty well.
Section 64 and 65 talk about house numbers from a display presentation perspective but only go so far as saying "houses with such numbers as the commissioners approve of" but I cannot locate where it describes what systems are approved by commissioners.
Are you able to guide me to the part which does describe what the "approved" system is? I'm rather curious to read it because what I've seen and read to date has lead to to believe it's really more of an agreed convention than anything legislative so very interested to read what the actual rules are.
Cul-de-sacs number clockwise consecutively rather than following one side odd, other even.
Some of the strange situations where it breaks stem from WW2 bomb damage breaking a road in two, or removing a dozen houses etc.
Most councils do regulate street names and numbering, and they seem broadly in agreement. No idea of legislation or origin of the convention, but seems nationwide.
Example - chosen as it was one of the longer ones search popped up: https://www.swale.gov.uk/street-naming-policy/
Not really, there are plenty of businesses that have big enough buildings that they have a single postal code to themselves.
Indeed but doesn't contradict my point because it's still just a location. The only difference is in your example it's home to a singular business rather than multiple residential buildings.
As an aside, I've worked in some buildings that actually had multiple post codes. This is common with large government buildings such as County / City Halls.
Why wouldn't the locals want street names?
So… they've reinvented japanese block-based addressing except shittier all around, and proprietary?