Slashdot Mirror
Longer Bar Codes Coming in 2005
D_Fresh writes "The same thing that's happening to phone numbers is also happening in retail. The NYT (blahfreeregnotreallyblah) has a story about longer bar codes which will be required for U.S. retailers by 2005. Apparently they're running out of 12-digit codes and need to add a digit, but the code rework for this is non-trivial. Some shortsighted chains *cough*Kmart*cough* may be caught with their pants down in late 2004, since some scanners will simply crash if they scan a 13-digit code they can't handle. Enjoy your :CueCats while they last..."
I did not RTFA, but I think it's worth noting that barcodes aren't unique. I worked retail for a couple of years and in two or three instances I found duplicates.
The store I worked at sold a lot of really cheap stuff, so maybe the problem was rogue manufacturers just randomly generating their product barcodes, hence a pinata might scan as a puzzle.
When we found duplicates we'd just print our own barcodes (which always started with four zeros, I think, to keep them unique) and stick them over top of the manufacturer's barcode.
The global economy is a great thing until you feel it locally.
There are a lot of products out there, especially when you consider old products since the beginning of barcoding.
It wouldn't be good practice to reuse old numbers just like it would be good to reuse dead Social Security numbers.
I was recently standing in line at the local Sears Hardware store. The guy in front of me was buying an air conditioner. The teller accidentally scanned the shipping label barcode on the box instead of the UPC barcode. It crashed his cash register and all the other cash registers and the server in the back office.
I can just imagine what a nightmare adding a 13th digit is going to be in a system that is that brittle.
When properly modified, A CueCat can scan larger bar codes. As long as the start/end markers on the code remain the same, there should be no worries
Here's an ISBN number I just scanned (maybe this'll get Amazon slashdotted too)
9780924771453
It uses the 39 barcode standard IIRC, just like UPC
2D barcodes can hold up to 2000 or more characters. PDF417 (a 2D symbology) is in the public domain, created by Symbol which allows this many characters. You can download a free PDF417 Generator and roll your own 2D barcodes. The only drawback is that a 2D barcode requires a more precise scanner and technique.
3D Barcodes are indeed 'bumpy' and can even be painted over.
Well, we had a large hardware base that can real only 12 digits, right ?
There isn't enough numbers, right ?
Then, why not use TWO bar codes unless expend a large money to implement 1 digit more ?
I believe a combination of two bar codes of 12 digits will be a lot cheaper and efficient, maybe not too easy to handle but it's a fast solution until we gradually change the protocols to something more plausible..
As far as them representing a number goes - bars only represent numbers if you intend them to - the bars in a prison cell don't represent anything. It also happens that the relationship between numbers and bar patterns is different on the two sides of the code (so the scanner can determine orientation I've heard). So, the same bar pattern on both sides could not represent the same number.
I happen to be a Christian - and my feeling is that the gist of the passage you allude to is that the number "666" is a symbol that all men will be required to take which will represent their open rebellion to the authority of God. The passage tends to lose its meaning if people were tricked into wearing the symbol.
Just because the scanning device and the machine attached to it are CAPABLE of reading 13-digit barcodes does NOT mean that the databases and software that deal with inventory are programmed to handle the extra digit. Anyone that works with any sort of software similar to the kind used to track shipments and inventory will tell you than an extra digit creates chaos. The real trick isn't updating the scanning equipment, it's updating everything behind the scanner that uses the barcode information, because, much like the Y2K debacle, the inventory computers simply aren't programmed to recognize anything except certain barcodes.
Granted, Coke can use an 8 digit barcode, but if you do your research, you'll learn that certain companies are able to do that because they have a large number of zeros in their company signature (digits 2 through 6 on the 12-digit system) and in their product signatures (digits 7 through 11). The scanners and software recognize this and simply insert zeros in predetermined places. The easiest place to see this is if you check shelf labels in grocery stores. They print their own and so use the 12-digit system. Other than a few zeros, the numbers are identical. Thus, even though it APPEARS as if the system can handle other barcode lengths, reality is still the 12-digit system.
This will be a tough crossover and should be quite interesting. At least we know we can stiill buy hardware from ACE.
However, current hardware can't cope with these, and label designers would have fits if they had to make room for a typical EAN 128 code. They are not small by any definition of the word if applied in the way they were designed to be applied, even if the codeset is compact.
However, if EAN 128 were to be widespread, the barcode could contain lots of other nifty data, like expiry dates, traceability info (who made the bit of meat you hold in your hand), the lot number of the delivery. The code is extensible, and would have no problem accomodating a new, n-numbered identification number.
However, 13 digits seem to be sufficient in Europe right now.