[talk-au] The Paradox of Postcodes (Was Re: Victorian Vicmap Address Import Proposal - Suburb and Postcode discussion)

Adam Horan ahoran at gmail.com
Thu Jun 17 08:08:56 UTC 2021

The ABS have an interesting factsheet on postcodes and their own 'Postal
Area' interpretation (POA).
It starts with this statement:
*"A postcode is a four digit number used by Australia Post to assist with
mail delivery. Australia Post does not currently define geographic
boundaries for postcodes. However, a number of organisations, such as PSMA
Australia Limited, create geographic boundaries that aim to define the
geographic extent of the mail delivery area for each postcode. Defining
postcodes with a geographic boundary is an imprecise process, and this is
demonstrated by the fact that there are variations in boundaries released
by different organisations."*

Some postcodes cross state boundaries, one example is 3644 which covers
Cobram in VIC and Lalalty in NSW

There are also regions with no postcode, eg parts of the wilderness in West

Some postcodes cover non-contiguous areas eg 3585 which is in two parts

In VIC at least shapefiles for postcodes exist, I didn't search more
broadly. The VIC data is aligned to property boundaries.


Google seems to have pretty accurate shapes for postcodes - but no idea of
their sourcing.



On Thu, 17 Jun 2021 at 16:08, stevea <steveaOSM at softworkers.com> wrote:

> I know (I know), I’m talking to the Australia list and I’m in the USA
> (California).  I have friends from Oz, but I’ve never been (I’d love to
> visit as a tourist, it’s on my bucket list).
> In the USA, the USPS (postal service) uses five-digit “ZIP” codes (Zone,
> digit 1; Improvement, digits 2 and 3; Plan, digits 4 and 5) for what you
> call postcodes, the five-digit version generally identifies a single post
> office, big or small.  Started in the 1960s (or so), they have grown to
> “ZIP+4” codes (nine digits) that seem to specify right down to a “side of a
> street on a block,” single apartment building, or even individual house
> level.  I believe there are even 11-digit versions (crawling right up yer
> bum, it seems; with 11 digits, even my cat could have his own ZIP code).
> On the other hand, I have a Post Office box (identified by four digits) and
> the post office is identified by its five-digit ZIP code.  I once
> test-mailed an envelope to myself with just nine digits properly hyphenated
> (no name, no house number, no street, no city, no state), and sure enough,
> it arrived in my box.  (It had the usual "sprayed-on” zebra/barcode
> representing the ZIP+4 along the bottom to facilitate machine-reading
> further along the pipeline that all our other mail has, too, but was
> otherwise addressed with “only the ZIP+4”).
> Three points about ZIP codes which might be similar to postcodes in
> Australia (and Canada and the UK, it seems):  despite what most people
> think, ZIP codes are NOT required for a letter to be delivered.  It might
> take a bit longer without one, but it WILL be delivered.  City, State,
> ZIP?  (Or ZIP+4?):  not really required, as City, State (only) does
> suffice.  Secondly, I’ve discerned (and had others who should know confirm)
> that a ZIP code is much like a “routing algorithm” (of 5, 9 or 11 digits):
> it is NOT a geographic area that can be (easily) described by a polygon,
> even a multipolygon.  I mean, plenty of cartographic gymnastics have made
> geographic areas OUT OF ZIP codes (or postcodes) — some relatively
> “successfully” (accurately?) but they are not such things (a geographic
> area, even as they seem as though they are).
> Finally, the whole thing about “these are the property of the post office
> and we’re going to be very non-sharing with them…” seems to be widespread
> with postcodes, I’m not sure why that is, but hey, if postal services want
> their codes to be proprietary, they can do that.  But that should make
> cartographers like us think twice about why we’re including them in a map:
> what, exactly, can putting these data in OUR map “buy” us by doing so?
> Yes, I know there is a general attitude of “postcodes are NEEDED, else how
> will the mail get delivered!” (thought in our mind’s voice approaching a
> shrill panic).  But, recall, (at least in the USA, maybe Australia, Canada,
> UK..., too) they aren’t strictly needed, but are more of a convenience for
> automation and the internal workings of how to sort and deliver mail, not
> really a function a map needs to provide its consumers (anyway).
> Things to think about, and perhaps quite non-overlapping, but I felt like
> typing all that, so thanks for reading.
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-au mailing list
> Talk-au at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/attachments/20210617/4567d656/attachment-0001.htm>

More information about the Talk-au mailing list