I expect the machine to kick a problem out as unreadable.
Honolulu doesn't seem unreasonable (especially if Inouye or Akaka
hadn't gotten any pork in a while); supposedly everything sent via
FedEx passes through Nashville (or have they meanwhile set up some
sort of regional hub system?).
On Aug 30, 12:02*am, Jay Freedman wrote:
Well. that assumes there is a human operator, and that anyone notices the
mistake before it goes out the door. We recently mailed a package from
Pennsylvania to Oregon, and the USPS tracking site told us that it went through
the Honolulu sorting facility. :-(
On Fri, 29 Aug 2008 20:14:04 -0700 (PDT), grammatim
wrote:
(In which case the human operator will probably get it right, and the
machine will probably get it wrong.)
On Aug 29, 7:57*pm, Jay Freedman wrote:
I don't know whether there is a significant reduction in processing time for
individual mail pieces if you supply the bar codes -- that's why I asked what
you'd been told. I've occasionally searched the Postal Service site atwww.usps.comandnever found an unequivocal statement.
I have read that the large mail sorting facilities have very high-speed machines
that can read addresses and apply a bar code, but I don't know whether all mail
is processed that way. I also don't know what the difference in processing time
might be between precoded and uncoded mail pieces -- but I suspect it's less
than a minute unless the address contains a mistake.
On Fri, 29 Aug 2008 14:06:03 -0700, Ed wrote:
Jay,
Thanks for the quick response.
It was in fact a postal employee who advised me of this. *I am not sure if
he was in fact referring to a POSTNET code, but he did say that any items
that posessed any such tag would be processed through the sort process 'much'
more quickly. *The only reason I ever used this feature was beacuse I
'thought' I could get more time-sensitive correspondence to it's destination
more quickly. *Was I wasting my time?
Thanks,
Ed
"Jay Freedman" wrote:
For directions, see
http://groups.google.com/group/micro...cmanagement/br....
I'm curious about who informed you that a Word-printed bar code reduces lag
time. Was it a Postal Service employee? Are you sure they were referring to
a POSTNET code and not one of the newer codes? Did they say, or even imply,
that the reduction in lag time was significant?
--
Regards,
Jay Freedman
Microsoft Word MVP * * * *FAQ:http://word.mvps.org
Email cannot be acknowledged; please post all follow-ups to the newsgroup so
all may benefit.
Ed wrote:
Thanks Susan,
I was informed that the inclusion of the bar code reduces postage
handling and therefore reduces the lag time for the item. *Any
thoughts? *Is there any easy way to convert a zip+4 into a barcode?
Any suggestions?
Thanks!
Ed
"Suzanne S. Barnhill" wrote:
Microsoft removed this feature because the POSTNET codes produced by
Word were no longer USPS-compliant. See "The POSTNET bar code that
Word generates no longer qualifies for USPS bulk mailing discounts"
athttp://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=897290. You can still insert a
BARCODE field manually, but it's somewhat pointless (I still do it
out of habit).
--
Suzanne S. Barnhill
Microsoft MVP (Word)
Words into Type
Fairhope, Alabama USA
"Ed" wrote in message
...
I used to do it in a previous version. *When I go to where it used
to be the
option does not show. *I am confused by the solutions I have seen
on the WEB.
Please help.--