Does the system allow for one mistake? Does it automatically try to replace '1' with 'L' and see if it matches a valid code?
I wonder the actual failure rate is. If you decided to not use '0' to avoid confusion, you've accepted that there shall be confusion. And confusion doesn't just happen with '0' and 'O'.
P.S: as a sidenote I know for a fact that at least 30 years ago there were post offices in some EU countries already doing OCR on handwriting, but the ones I've seen were doing it on digits-only, that had to be written on envelopes with pre-printed empty rectangles. It was done for the cities' postcode, to sort the mail automatically.
A well-formed, hand-written O is indistinguishable from a well-formed, hand-written zero. Literally, no amount of effort will make it clear which one is intended, short of some agreed-upon convention to use a different glyph like a slashed O for zero.
This is not true of G and 6 or B and 8. If these are well-formed, they are completely distinct.
People who paid for their post code are motivated to write the code clearly, for fear of nondelivery; but no amount of motivation will fix 0 versus O.
> The handwriting '1' looks like a 'L'.
It certainly does not. Rather, the lower case l is easily confused for the digit 1. This postzegelcode doesn't use lower case.
I don't see it mentioned that I is avoided because of 1. The likely reason is that Europeans don't write 1 just as a stick. It starts with an angled upstroke. That upstroke makes it possible to confuse the European 1 with an American 7; but the European 7 has a horizontal stroke across its stem which thwarts that problem. (I addition, a cursive 7's upper horizontal stroke is actually wavy, like a tilde.) Confusion of I, 1 and 7 in European handwriting is next to nil.
> The likely reason is that Europeans don't write 1 just as a stick. It starts with an angled upstroke.
I'm European, and that's how I write it, but if you look at the link, that's not how they write 1's in the promotional material - Those 1's follow pretty much the stroke I would do for an L, only the foot is shorter and slightly more pointed upward.
I see that. Yikes! The hand in the photo (we are to undestand) copied a pair of nicely typeset 1s, featuring with an upstroke and serif foot, into a pair of sloppy hockey sticks that looks like lower case l's due to the pen trails, and could be taken for I.
Maybe it's not for technical reasons. It would be easy technically to have them be interchangeable. But someone who just purchased a stamp, and got one with a 0 or an 0, might worry about it not being delivered because their 0 might be mistaken for an 0. So maybe it's just nice UX? Just a guess.
That is cute. But what about 'G' and '6', 'B' and '8' and the myriad of things that can go SNAFU when handwriting is involved?
Heck, even on the official picture here:
https://www.postnl.nl/versturen/postzegels/postzegels-kopen/...
The handwriting '1' looks like a 'L'.
Does the system allow for one mistake? Does it automatically try to replace '1' with 'L' and see if it matches a valid code?
I wonder the actual failure rate is. If you decided to not use '0' to avoid confusion, you've accepted that there shall be confusion. And confusion doesn't just happen with '0' and 'O'.
P.S: as a sidenote I know for a fact that at least 30 years ago there were post offices in some EU countries already doing OCR on handwriting, but the ones I've seen were doing it on digits-only, that had to be written on envelopes with pre-printed empty rectangles. It was done for the cities' postcode, to sort the mail automatically.