Should International Philately Develop A Single System For Philatelic Identification???

I would add that anyone can develop a specification for a universal numbering system. All it takes is some time, some thought, and to document it. So if we assume that the specification is done and well documented; what are the challenges?

Is the desire to have a universal numbering system or is the desire to have a cross index of existing numbering systems? A brand new, independent universal numbering system is far more feasible than a cross index from a legal and logistical standpoint. Seems to me that utilizing existing numbering systems by simply adding prefixes/suffixes would be open to many legal challenges.

Consider the following example which outlines the logistical challenge of a cross index. The relationship between two catalog numbers (let's use Scott and SG) can be one of several types. The simplest is a one-to-one relationship; Scott #123 = SG #321. But it also can be a more complex one-to-many relationship; Scott #123 = SG #321, SG #321a, SG #321b, etc. So our specification has to handle these situations.

Even more difficult is the human involvement in determining the cross index 'matching' of each catalog listing. Imagine sitting down with two catalogs and trying to make sense of the color varieties. One catalog lists 4 color varieties but the other one lists 12. And who makes the decisions on the universal color naming nomenclature? Does 'rose' listed in one catalog mean the same as 'pink' in another catalog? Point is, this isn't a simply a matter of merging the data via a query; humans will have to visit every single cross indexed record and make decisions. It is these decisions that would determine the quality of the effort.
Don
APS #094826

In the real world in which Philately resides states profit makes the world go round. No profit, no incentive.

I don't see a universal numbering system evolving much less being accepted by the collectors. I don't see the problem a universal catalog or numbering system solves.

One bunny trail might be that the world is carved into sectors whose stamps are covered, faithfully, accurately and in detail, by a particular publisher. I don't see any such agreement or evolution down that path.

However, there would be some hobby-wide benefit if the publishers would agree to standardize their color naming schemes, criteria of what stamp requires a new number or subset, what is considered as an error or freak, what is considered a stamp (CTO) and so on.

The key to solving problems for collectors collecting is translate them into financial gains for someone else - the publishers.

I am certain that they have already seen their sales declining as the collecting population matures with only a handful of new and young collectors following. One of their only hopes to increase sales (profit) is to encourage more collectors, current collectors to collect more variety, and breaking down the issues that burden us when it relates to general standardizing across the catalog publishing world.

This kind of reminds of the joke about have 1000 different software programming languages and then decide to standardize on new single language. The result is we have 1001 programming languages.

Al

I ran into exactly this problem doing some work for someone. It is not just that one catalog listed more varieties than the other, they also used different names for the colors of the same stamps.

One I particularly remember - one catalog listed light brown and dark brown, the other brown and chocalate. Dark or Milk?

You're mixing apples and oranges. You're talking about a concordance or cross-index what we created is a platform by which all stamps can be contained in a single database file which is essential to electronic file maintenance and updating. Think of a system that allows stock quotations randomly generated but always properly reported without manual intervention. In order to have universal stamp information requires two things, a number prefixing system to identify countries and sections and it requires a concordance to link one catalog to another. We created the prefixing system essential to identify which country you are talking about. The concordance requirement is an ongoing effort only partial completed and relies on collector participation. In the long run the solution is a universal stamp identification numbering system that is logical and computer compatible much as the system used in the securities industries called CUSIP.