Path: csiph.com!usenet.pasdenom.info!aioe.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Tim Hill Newsgroups: comp.sys.acorn.misc Subject: Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2012 16:04:43 +0000 (GMT) Organization: timil.com Lines: 35 Message-ID: <526f5d5e91tim@invalid.org.uk> References: <8e12bd6952.c.n.l.f@virgin.net> <5269d59248steve@revi11.plus.com> <526baffc2bnews*@Torrens.org.uk> <526e2f48fbbbailey@argonet.co.uk> <83bd416e52.graham@durain.demon.co.uk> <8040476e52.graham@durain.demon.co.uk> <9s13ueF8i8U1@mid.individual.net> <3960576e52.dougjwebb@doug.j.webb.btinternet.com> <0d285f6e52.dougjwebb@doug.j.webb.btinternet.com> <526e727ea6see.sig@walkingingermany.invalid> <526e7a41ceron.briscoe@blueyonder.co.uk> <526ee75baeSpambin@argonet.co.uk> <526eeb5234ron.briscoe@blueyonder.co.uk> <526ef6c32bSpambin@argonet.co.uk> <526eba31d3ajg@argonet.co.uk> <526f09974fSpambin@argonet.co.uk> <526f17ea18charles@charleshope.demon.co.uk> <526f261a9ctim@invalid.org.uk> <526f5bfc96see.sig@walkingingermany.invalid> NNTP-Posting-Host: GqAcIUbqh27oTTI3Dt5hJw.user.speranza.aioe.org X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org User-Agent: Pluto/3.04c (RISC-OS/5.16) NewsHound/v1.50-32 X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2 Xref: csiph.com comp.sys.acorn.misc:4231 In article <526f5bfc96see.sig@walkingingermany.invalid>, Russell Hafter News wrote: > In article <526f261a9ctim@invalid.org.uk>, Tim Hill > wrote: > > > so do we, but 100+ names and addresses is getting bit much. I now > > > use a suitable "handwritten" font in conjunction with Datapower. > > Can the Royal Mail's kit read postcodes automatically if they're in a > > script font? Certainly unlikely for some handwriting. > AFAIK, no. > Any info I have on this is on the PC, which is switched off at present, > but I am pretty certain that if you want to claim a discount on sending > more than a minimum number of similar letters, both the actual address > layout (position on the envelope as well as line spacing, font size > etc.) and the typeface required are strictly regulated. > The scheme that I looked at a couple of years ago for sending out > brochures required the address to be printed on the envelope, not on a > label, and I think the font had to be Helvetica, or something very > similar. All true but that's to /ensure/ the barcode and address is machine-readable. AIUI the system can and does cater for handwriting too but more of that fails and needs human intervention. -- Tim Hill of timil.com . . . * supports TFT & shares in cheaper ethical telecoms http://tjrh.eu/phone * has a genuine & spam-proof address for Usenet http://www.invalid.org.uk/ * accepts incoming email: substitute postmaster@ for tim@ ... "I am not of that feather, to shake off my friend when he must need me" Tim of Ath, Act i, Sc.1