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..."
Adding a digit would add quite a few barcodes, but why not add a couple of digits just in case. Since they already have to rework some hardware and software, would it really be that difficult to take it up to 14 or 15 digits?
You have enemies? Good. That means you've stood up for something, sometime in your life. --Winston Churchill
Twelve digits ought to be enough for everyone...
I think...I think it's in my basement. Let me go upstairs and check. -M.C. Escher (1898-1972)
Bigger Bar Code Inches Up on Retailers
By KATE MURPHY
In a little more than two years, retailers in the United States and Canada will face a deadline that promises technological challenges akin to the Year 2000 computer problem.
Starting Jan. 1, 2005, the 12-digit bar codes retailers use to identify everything from cars to candy bars will go to 13 digits. The additional number (and associated bars and spaces) is enough to make checkout scanners seize up and make computers crash, perhaps disrupting entire supply chains.
But many retailers have yet to focus on a problem that will require significant investments in time and capital.
"Most retailers are public companies that tend to live quarterly and not look ahead, which means they are going to be hit over the head with this and have to scramble at the last minute to avert disaster," said Thomas Friedman, president of Retail Systems Research Services, a company in Newton, Mass., that publishes a retail information technology newsletter.
Leading retailers say they have begun to address the issue. A spokesman for Wal-Mart Stores, the world's largest retailer, said the company had "embraced the concept" of an expanded bar code, but he did not respond to questions about actual measures taken to prepare computer databases and logistical systems. Similarly, a spokesman for the Target Corporation said his company was "intellectually ready" for the change but refused to comment on whether any of its stores or warehouses were technologically ready.
But Richard A. Galanti, the chief financial officer of Costco Wholesale, admitted, "The truth is, given the timeline, everybody's still in the assessment phase, trying to figure out what to do."
The difficulty is similar to the one posed by the Year 2000 computer problem, when computer software had to be switched from two-digit entries identifying years to four-digit entries. Before Jan. 1, 2000, millions of lines of code had to be rewritten to avoid widespread computer failures.
Bar codes have been used in packaging since 1974, when the first item, a pack of chewing gum, was scanned at a supermarket in Ohio. The codes identify a product, distinguishing between an eight-ounce can of Del Monte creamed corn and a medium-size pair of Hanes boxer shorts. When a bar code is scanned, the information in the store's database lets the retailer assign a price and track sales and inventory.
"The bar code is the linchpin upon which everything in retail depends," Mr. Friedman said.
The reason for expanding the 12-digit bar code, known as the Universal Product Code, is twofold. First, there is a shortage of U.P.C. numbers. "There's only a certain amount of 12-digit numbers, and we're going to run out," said John Terwilliger, vice president of global markets at the Universal Code Council, a nonprofit organization based in Lawrenceville, N.J., that assigns codes in the United States and Canada. Second, 13-digit bar codes are used almost everywhere else in the world. The council's European counterpart, EAN International, based in Brussels, assigns these numbers, called European Article Numbers, to companies in 99 nations. "Right now," Mr. Terwilliger said, "foreign importers have to get a 12-digit U.P.C. to do business over here, which they haven't been too happy about."
Foreign manufacturers currently pass on to consumers the cost of getting an additional bar code and creating special labels for products sold in the United States and Canada. "It's an added expense for them, and they have to recoup it somewhere," said Debra Shimkus, marketing manager at the Chicago Importing Company, a specialty food importer whose overseas suppliers are often incredulous when they are told they have to get new bar codes for their products before they can be sold in American groceries.
Many foreign manufacturers decide that it is not worth the trouble. "A lot of companies have been unwilling to accept the additional burden," Mr. Terwilliger said, "and have stayed out of the market entirely."
American and Canadian exporters have not had the same obstacle because foreign retailers can easily incorporate a 12-digit number into their 13-digit databases by making the first digit zero. That is why American and Canadian manufacturers of products that now have 12-digit codes will not be affected by the code expansion. A two-liter bottle of Coca-Cola, for example, will keep the same U.P.C., but a zero will be added to the beginning of its bar-code number in retailers' product databases.
"The effect of the change in the U.P.C. code falls squarely on retailers," said Mr. Friedman. He estimates that the upgrade will cost at least $2 million for a chain of 100 stores with 10 checkout lanes a store.
The expense will vary depending on the age of a retailer's databases, software and hardware and whether it has to hire outside consultants to make the change. Scanners and other hardware bought more than three years ago will not read longer codes and will have to be replaced. Software more than five years old will also have to be scrapped.
"Thank God we'd already planned to buy new equipment for a lot of stores this year," said Richard S. Gilbert, director of store systems at Duane Reade, a chain of 200 drugstores in New York City. The stores have a total of 3,500 scanning devices, each costing $1,000 to $2,500. As for the cumbersome database modifications that need to be made, Mr. Gilbert said: "Our consultants say they are working on it, but they haven't gotten back to me with a plan. I still don't know how big a deal it's all going to be."
He might want to ask John Poss. Mr. Poss is the merchandising coordinator for Ace Hardware, which has 5,100 stores and sells some 65,000 coded products. Ace overhauled its computer systems to accept longer bar codes in 1999. The company, based in Oak Brook, Ill., has retail outlets in 70 countries and more than a hundred foreign suppliers.
"It was such a struggle to get manufacturers to relabel things for North America," Mr. Poss said, "and we wanted the same system in place globally, so we decided to make the change."
The company hired a consultant, Cognizant Technology Solutions, which is based in Teaneck, N.J., and is a division of Dun & Bradstreet. Ace's in-house team worked on the project during the day while a Cognizant office in India took over at night.
Even so, the project took almost two years to plan and carry out. In addition to equipment upgrades, modifications had to be made in more than 500 software programs in various company divisions (50 in distribution alone). The most tedious and time-consuming part of the conversion, Mr. Poss said, was making adjustments to databases. "Every database in every division touches bar code information, and they all needed to be reworked," he said. "It's like Y2K, where you had to go in and expand fields and find every reference to the date."
Though Mr. Poss would not disclose the cost of the project, he said the gains in efficiency and in suppliers' good will had been "well worth the expense." His advice to other retailers is to "get busy because you're facing an extreme challenge."
But moving to 13 digits may not be enough. The Universal Code Council and EAN International, which formed an alliance in 1996, strongly advise manufacturers and retailers to go a step further and prepare their systems to accommodate a 14-digit code. That is the length of a newly patented bar code that takes up less space. Its reduced size means that it can be affixed to small items like loose produce, and the extra digits let a retailer keep track of additional data like batch and lot numbers.
That additional information would make product recalls easier. "Today," Mr. Terwilliger said, "once a product is taken out of the shipping container in the warehouse, you really can't track it anymore."
Shipping container bar codes are already 14 digits. The different bar-code standards mean that retailers need different computer systems for shipping and receiving, inventory and sales. By adopting a 14-digit standard, retailers should be able to put all the information into a single database.
Mr. Poss said Ace had added the capacity to scan and store 14 digits when it made its conversion three years ago. "Now we can scan anything," he said, "whether it's in the warehouse or at the register, and it immediately goes in to a centralized system. No more sending data between divisions."
The cost and work of making the transition to 14 digits, he said, was the same as it would have been for a change to 13 digits.
Representatives from the standards groups said adopting a 14-digit structure -- a step for which no date has been set -- could help streamline the sharing of data among all parts of a retail operation. It would also make it possible, they said, to identify products anywhere in the world at any time during the trade process.
"And to think it all started with pack of gum," Mr. Poss said.
Anyone know how produce codes are assigned? How the hell do you go through 12 digits? Obviously a lot of it got wasted in some way.
It seems like there has to be a way to reclaim some of that.
Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
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.
...AOL had not insisted on a new barcode for every update of their free CDROM we'd have plenty of numbers left...
"Good things don't end with eum, they end with mania or teria." - H. Simpson
Is the extra digit going to be on the company side or the product side of the barcode?
slashdot!=valid HTML
Nope, the CueCat does everything in hardware. Just run cat and scan your cuecat over something and it will spit out junk to your buffer. Heck, the "decrypting" routine is so trivial that all you need is a one (somewhat long) line perl script to decode it.
I read the internet for the articles.
The move from IPv4 to IPv6 is an instructive example.
From the article... "The codes identify a product, distinguishing between an eight-ounce can of Del Monte creamed corn and a medium-size pair of Hanes boxer shorts. "
Phew... that's a relief. No more creamed corn undershorts for tybalt! I gotta get me one of these bar-code thingies.
Offical website:
http://www.uc-council.org/2005sunrise/
Quoting:
On January 1, 2005, the EAN.UCC System will open up a whole new era of global supply chain efficiency. Up until this date, the potential of the EAN.UCC System that is used today all around the world has never been fully realized. This is because products coming in to the U.S. and Canada that are typically identified with data structures other than the 12 digit U.P.C. cannot be stored in databases of North American companies. As of this monumental sunrise date, gone will be the inefficiencies that have come with North American databases that could only accept a 12 digit U.P.C.
This family of data structures is known as the Global Trade Item Number (GTIN). If your company's database is built on anything less than 14 digits, you should be making important changes. This 2005 Sunrise kit is here to help you. It will cover the following information:
GTIN Definition
GTIN family of data structures
Explanation of how these changes affect North American
Databases
A sample letter you can use to notify your systems/service providers
UCC Company Prefix assignment changes and updates related to January 1, 2005
Resources for further information
You Don't Have to Wait till 2005!
As soon as you change your databases, your company will be equipped to handle a greater range of global products. The good news is you don't have to wait until 2005 to reap these benefits. If you plan and implement now, your company can immediately take advantage of this powerful global commerce tool.
Also, the Thirteenth digit will [REDACTED BY HOMELAND SECURITY]
NO CONNECTION
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.
Leading retailers say they have begun to address the issue. A spokesman for Wal-Mart Stores , the world's largest retailer, said the company had "embraced the concept" of an expanded bar code, but he did not respond to questions about actual measures taken to prepare computer databases and logistical systems. Similarly, a spokesman for the Target Corporation said his company was "intellectually ready" for the change but refused to comment on whether any of its stores or warehouses were technologically ready.
It's kind of shaming that Wal Mart, whom we have allowed to take over just about everything, is actually that stupid.
On a related note, I just love the NYT. Today I got to be a government official from American Samoa making less than $20k who subscribes to the Times.
I spent a year in Iraq looking for WMD and all I found was this lousy sig.
Does anyone know if old bar cdes are ever reused, or when a product is cancelled, is it just retired. For example, is the bar code for "New Coke" usable for some other, less-disgusting product, like Motor Oil, or has it forever disappeared into the ether.
Additionally, is there one governing body which assigns bar codes? Or is up to the manufacturer to make sure they assign a unique bar code?
What about other countries? Do other countries have the same bar codes for the same products?
"Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one " -Albert Einstein
Now, slip a little radio transciever tag onto the thing and we're in busines...
The Mongrel Dogs Who Teach
first a barcode is 12 digits, however the first and last digit are control digits and are not used to identify the product, but to check if the code is plausable.
second europe/asia uses 13digit upc's
as far as i know, there are private class upc ranges, someone metioned starting with 0000, at work we use 8888 so perhaps 0000-9999 is a private range..
this is how i thin kit is, i could be flat out wrong..
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
Wouldn't it be best to acquire software or devices that can be expanded much more should the need arise? For example, make all the hardware and software capable of handling barcodes arbitrarily long (or just up to 32, perhaps) so that when the UCC and EAN decide to make the next upgrade, it'll be as easy as setting a variable?
Are their technical limitations to doing such a thing? the scanners they talked about, at $1000 bucks a shot, could certainly have some kind of flash memory without increasing their cost more than a dollar or two.
Just my thoughts, anyway.
Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms should be the name of a store, not a government agency.
Why not just use two barcodes on everything?
Obviously the first thought is why not more digits. Turns out that most of the world already (or always has?) used 13 digits. The result is that companies get pissed when they have to apply for another UPC and all that comes with it just to sell their product from one side of the pond to the other.
So close and yet so far from the world's perfect ID number
Some shortsighted chains *cough*Kmart*cough* may be caught with their pants down in late 2004
I used to work in Kmart. Our IBM Type III registers say the following when you scan an invalid barcode - "ERR: Must be between 8-13 digits". With a message like that, once can presume that the registers *are* capable of scanning the 13 digit UPCs...and that it's a back-end (IE - Receiving, distribution, inventory) change that's needed.
Considering that I've not seen a Kmart that *wasn't* using these old Type III's, I hardly say that Kmart is getting caught "with their pants down". They're further along the transition than some other companies that have *no* 13-digit capable equipment.
"Mod, mod, mod...and another troll bites the dust."
Those things UPS uses are 2-D barcodes. Scanners for them are somewhat more expensive and less robust. When you are talking about revving all of the point-of-sale terminals in the US, it's a big deal.
I am not a number! I am a man! And don't you
Format is:
The reason they're not going to 14+ digits is they're really just becomming compatable with the rest of the world, which uses 13 digits, and hoping to steal some unallocated number ranges in there (shades of IP Addresses.) Going to 14+ would be a worldwide change, which is, obviously, somewhat harder to accomplish.
Enjoy your :CueCats while they last...
CueCats don't scan *only* UPCs. They can scan any barcoding, regardless of its coding scheme, as long as it has the start and ending components that it recognizes (and it recognizes quite a few). What *you* make of the resulting data is your deal. I've scanned 20-digit printed barcodes with my Cat.
For simple proof, scan an ISBN. Those are 13 digits by default. CueCats can read those.
"Mod, mod, mod...and another troll bites the dust."
Sure, a 13 digit number, and 666 embedded in the bar code - the anti-christ is coming soon - it's all falling into place now.
-josh
Free Mac Mini
It seems like we've got linux drivers for it, couldn't we "teach" (program) it to work with the extra digit?
Not that I care, I only used the sucker twice just to say I had done it.
The man who trades freedom for security does not deserve nor will he ever receive either. - Benjamin Franklin
Note that the article saysSince they bought the new equipment a lot less than three years ago, all it'll take to get Kmart up and running with the 13-char barcode will be a software upgrade.
Kmart isn't even mentioned in the article--I looked for it specifically when I first read it yesterday. How about being a little more careful with the facts in your editorializing, eh, Slashdot people?
Editor Emeritus and Senior Writer, TeleRead.org
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.
Does this mean that I'm going to have to get the barcode that's tatooed onto the back of my neck redone?
--You will rephrase your request for me to go to hell. Goto statements are not acceptable programming constructs
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..
Formats like the Aztec code can hold up to 3000 characters of information. Rather than re-engineer something inefficient (UPC), why not adapt something new and completely extinguish the problem?
Info on barcodes, UPC symbols, maxicode, etc.
I believe you're referring to 2D barcode, which instead of using the width of the bars, use the height as well, giving approximately the square of the amount of info that a 1D bar code occupying the same space would provide.. pdf
See
http://www.aurorabarcode.com/PDF/2D%20Bar%20Codes
for more info.
Yes. So long as you dont turn around and sell it for a profit, yes.
"Old man yells at systemd"
Why pick an upper limit? As long as there is some way for the scanner to detect "end of string" (EOS) or whatevertheycallit.
These people need the Software Engineering Clue Stick (unless by off chance there is a real justification that has yet to be presented, but I doubt it unless it has to due with backward compability to an earlier clue-stick-needer-design. Maybe some hardware limit back then that prevented and EOS marker?)
Give them the Y2K award.
Table-ized A.I.
I've often wondered about the references people make to barcodes being the mark of the beast. Everywhere else, outside the US, uses 13 digits, which screws that up entirely... It would be 664, the guy across the street from the beast.
I really hope they *do* barcode every atom in the universe.
By the way, the number of atoms in the universe is estimated to be around 10^80, not 10^20. That's a biiiig difference!
Not that simple. On the 12 digit barcode, as far as UPC's are concerned, you only have 10 usable digits, and even then, for reatil applications, there are strict allocation guidlines.
UCC Reference
Digit 1: Code, UCC Prefix.
Digits 2-6: Company Number
Digits 7-11: Item Reference
Digit 12: Check
Thus, you only have 10 useable digits for identifying products, and only 100,000 different companies to dole out 100,000 UPC's, (multiply by 3 because the first digit is 0, 6, or 7 for standard products.) That's 3.0 * 10^10 combinations. However, like IP addresses, these are handed out in inefficient methods, because they go in blocks of 100,000. Which means you need to pay somebody some money to get ahold of one.
This is a common problem for aspiring independent artists who want to get their music out. They get to make a choice... do I pay someone for a UPC, or do I go without? Stores generally won't accept a CD for sale w/o a UPC code on it. (Barring local merchants who may be willing to stock the item and either just put a price tag on it, or use one of their own UPC's. (UPC's beginning with 4 are reserved for such "internal applications". If your grocery store has a bulk foods department, and prints out UPC codes from a scale, the code will probably begin with 4.)
And the UCC is the body responsible for handing out the company codes.
--You will rephrase your request for me to go to hell. Goto statements are not acceptable programming constructs
Longer bar codes are coming to win us They're coming to win us, they're coming to win us Longer boats are coming to win us Hold on to the core, they'll be taking the key from the door. ;-)
The database may need a field expanded from 12 characters to whatever but almost all barcode readers just insert the stream into a serial port or the keyboard. they can read 30000 character barcodes as long as start and end are correct.
the only hardware I had trouble with was really old or crappily made scanners that have built in limitations.. even the cuecat can read arbitary length barcodes...
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
I saw a presentation by a senior exec from Alien Technology recently, and it was astounding. RFID utilizes incredibly small processor packages that are able to wirelessly communicate with other devices. The real breakthrough is that they can make these devices communicate without manual scanning, and they can manufacture them in volume extremely cheaply.
My guess is once this technology picks up steam, they'll be everywhere, from price tags on the jacket you buy at the Gap, to the pound of ground turkey you snag at Safeway.
Of course, the potential for misbehavior with these things is huge. But it's coming. All of the industry players are on board, the technology is in test production, and before long it'll be deployed.
Read the EFF's Fair Use FAQ
From my years as a book jockey I can tell you a few things about ISBN's.
1. ISBN's almost always start with zero or one, although that's changing as more companies get into the game. Texkbooks and reference books usually start with 9, for example.
2. The first 5 digits id the top level manufacturer. This was handy because imprints that were owned by another company still had the first 5 digits of their parent company's code - pocket books, for instance, is owned by simon and schuster.(although many pub's had more than one manufacturer code).
3. The second 5 digits are a product code.
4. The last two digits are a checksum to make sure the ISBN is valid. There's a formula something like "add the 1st, 3rd, 5th and 7th digits and divide by the 2nd, 4th, 6th and 8th digits. the checksum is the remainder." I don't know exactly what the formula is, but I'm dying to know, it's been bugging me for years.
Fun fact: Hardcover, trade paper and Mass Market editions of the same book have different ISBNs, but different editions/printings of the same book usually have the same isbn. While conserving available codes, it's quite annoying when someone's looking for a specific edition.
Triv
Just the right size for everyone's forehead!
The article seemed to try to create the same tension that the Y2K bug did. This doesn't even come close. No nuclear reactors will blow up and no planes will crash, and no electric grids will go offline when UPC codes change in size.
Retaillers are businesses. They need to sell products to survive. The UPC code is a vital component of the databases that make things work. Coupons, inventory, everything is based on it. So we're adding another digit and your ancient, poorly written accounting software didn't make room for a future expansion. So upgrade already. You're a business, you WILL find a way. Because if you don't, you'll be left in the dust. And while you're at it, perhaps you might want to make sure the UPC code space is larger than 13 digits. You never know when they might expand it AGAIN. Since the cost involved to jump from 12 to 13 is the same as the jump from 12 to 18, make a wise decision now.
This is just a normal part of the world as we know it. Things change. Phone numbers get longer, UPC codes get longer, computers get faster, operating systems redesign themselves. You have to adapt with it. Regardless, there's no sense in losing sleep over this.
-Restil
Play with my webcams and lights here
Those codeset and checksum digits, along with the code that seperates the manufacturer ID from the, Product ID, are two thin right-alligned lines, which is also the code for the number 6.
Meaning that every barcode has the number 666 on it.
"And he causes all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on their right hand or on their foreheads, and that no one may buy or sell except one who has the mark or the name of the beast, or the number of his name. Here is wisdom. Let him who has understanding calculate the number of the beast, for it is the number of man; his number is 666."(REVELATION 13:16-18)
Make of this what you will. Personally, I think it's the world's best practical joke.
I usually have no problem upping my firmware with only five fingers....
Oh you meant something else didn't you?
CAn'T CompreHend SARcaSm?
Now, slip a little radio transciever tag onto the thing and we're in busines...
It's already being done Autoidcenter.org
This concept seems to lead to the inevitable question, however... if they are only adding a single digit, it is likely that they will run out of room again sometime... It might take a few years, or even a few decades, but they will run out. And, to really make a mess out of things, the longer that this limitation is ignored, the more entrenched the inflexible standard will be by the time they _do_ run out of room.
Damned if you you do, and damned if you don't. Almost makes me wish that we had never crawled out of the oceans in the first place.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
You will be waving that scan gun over the barcodes unsuccessfully for even longer periods of time better spent just typing the product code in, if you knew how to type. You will now have carpal elbow.
We can approximate that number with the Hubble Constant and then just multiply by 1.5 or 2 (depends on the company you work for) :)
http://itss.raytheon.com/cafe/qadir/q1797.html
You can't handle the truth.
Naturally add DIGITS to your barcode!
Bigger Barcode NOW!
www.big-barcode.com
.
I remember reading about the bullseye bar codes, and evidently at the dawn of the bar code age in the late 60s, there was a competition between the two standards, and the rectangular bar codes were determined to be technically superior (able to hold more information in a smaller area, less susceptible to damage, etc).
Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
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.
Ah...knew it was one of those "but of course" things.
Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
A lot of retailers don't use the UPC, and instead use their own item SKUs (item numbers). This requires adding a barcode sticker to all items, which can be a hassle, but it means that you control your own item numbers. This is what we did when I worked for Williams-Sonoma and Pottery Barn. We used code-128 and Symbol scanners. and had item numbers of up to ten digits.
Also, I've worked with a lot of crappy old point of sale software, and lots of crappy scanners, and I'd be surprised if any crashed on a long barcode. Mostly likely they'll just beep and refuse to scan. (Though I suppose this depends on whether they are keyboard wedge (like the CueCat, simply generating keypresses) or a more direct connection like most older registers use. Keyboard wedge systems would be more susceptible to buffer overruns, but they are definately the low-end solution. I guess I can't say for sure generally, but I know that the barcode scanning code I wrote for Williams-Sonoma definitely will not crash over thirteen digits. :-)
The cake is a pie
CueCats aren't the only barcode scanners that will handle the longer formats. In fact, any company that sells barcode scanners outside of the US will be able to scan the EAN formats. It's simply a matter of reprogramming the scanner (which may require a small piece of software on a PC or just a matter of scanning programming codes into the scanner). And what other brands are out there probably use the scan engines from other companies, so at the most it'd be a software change, or possibly (at the worst) a rom upgrade.
Also many barcode scanners can be programmed to spit out a leading 0 on UPC 12 digit codes, so that the output is ALWAYS 13 digits, wether it's a UPC or EAN code that is scanned. UPC and EAN are basically the same format barcode, with subtle differences in what constitutes the 13th character in the code. It's not I2of5 or Code 39, which are other symbology types. The 14 digit ones are a mixed barcode type, but I don't know how popular they will be.
EAN has already specified EAN-128, which is the EAN code standard using the Codabar 128 barcode format. This allows VERY LONG barcodes, and many of these are for packaging in the warehouse, where you are marking boxes of items, or a shipping crate full of boxes, etc.
So the bogus comment in the NYT that everyone would have to upgrade their scanners is just that. Bogus. If anything, it's the sightless people that developed the databases behind the scenes that will be the problem. Now what does this remind me of..... oh yeah. Y2K. *sigh*
Subject says it all. Why not simply lease to every product a unique IP number with a lifespan of, say, 50 years? That way, you can get all sorts of extra info about the product at http:///index.html whenever the thing is sitting near the radio tag scanner (which would be powering the server with the same energy needed to create the resonance in the first place?)
- undoware.ca
The bullseye the original poster was referring to is the UPS-developed MaxiCode, which is a 2D symbology that can hold up to 93 characters of data.
John
Why don't we set the WayBack machine to 1971 and take a look at the computers you're asking this of? I've got a memory card from a 1970's era Unitote SLCC hanging on the wall in front of me. It has a whopping 16K of hand-wound magnetic cores, and is the size of a spiral-bound notebook. This card was from the controller for the whole store. The CPU consisted of several wire-wrapped circuit boards populated with discrete 74xx series chips. The power supply was bigger than my 17" monitor. The cash registers had 1K of RAM.
This was an era when the extra two digits representing the century would have meant two less columns on an 80 column punch card. That little insight saved them 3% of their total storage costs.
And now let's print those barcodes on our products. What, no laser printed master copies? I have to hire a separate company just to prepare the master films for my barcode.
I'm guessing that the UCC probably even considered that 12 digit UPCs would reach their end-of-life in 20 or 30 years. They also probably knew that by then we surely would have better equipment.
I'm amazed at the forethought and insight that went into designing a system that fit on the equipment of the day and withstood 31 years of use.
John
first a barcode is 12 digits
1: you mean a ucc(-?12?) barcode.
second europe/asia uses 13digit upc's
They are called ean-13 barcodes. NOT UPC's.
And note that the french use 14 digit article indentification barcodes as well.
So go for 14 digits in your article id db.
The 12 digit ucc codes can be mapped on the ean-13 codes. I don't know exactly how, but it is defined in the ean standard. From experierence i know it gets into problems with short 6 digit ucc codes.
-- my ean adress right now: 87.17045.00000.2
However, like IP addresses, these are handed out in inefficient methods, because they go in blocks of 100,000. Which means you need to pay somebody some money to get ahold of one.
Actually the UPC is worst than IP addresses since it only allows one block size. At least originally IP addresses allowed blocks of 253 65,533 or 16,777,213. Another situation where you see such a problem is telephone numbering, numbers being assigned in blocks of 10,000. Especially in places such as North America where you have fixed 3 digit area codes and 7 digit local numbers.
This is a common problem for aspiring independent artists who want to get their music out. They get to make a choice... do I pay someone for a UPC, or do I go without? Stores generally won't accept a CD for sale w/o a UPC code on it.
One thing the EAN (and for that matter ISBN) allows for different lengths of company and item fields. Thus it would be quite possible for such an artist to get an 8 or even 9 digit manufacturer code.
in REALLY OT form...
Why is it that archetects are afraid of having floor 13, but publishers aren't afraid of having chapter 11?
Whoever stated that signature sizes should be limited to one hundred and twenty characters can just go ahead and kiss my