Identity Cards

[Mic’haglh Autófil, SMC EiP]

After integrating much of the feedback -- as well as doing my best to make these ISO- and ICAO-compliant, I submit the following:

   

Please ignore that I look thoroughly pissed off in my passport photo LMAO

Dates updated to the correct DD.MM.YYYY format, but including the Talossan year.

Document number is [Last Initial][4-digit Citizen #][Year of issue][Check digit][Version/edition, starting at A]. Check digit is a wee bit simpler than its ICAO counterpart: take the value of each non-check digit (or 1-26 if it's a letter), including the edition, sum each of them, square that, and sum up the value of those digits. If over 26, take each of the digits of that sum and sum those, at which point you really should be under 26. Assign a letter based on the value gotten.

As an example, mine is A055122-A. A = 1. 1+0+5+5+1+2+2+1=17. 17^2=289. 2+8+9=19. The 19th letter of the alphabet is S.

I actually thought the design for the back was pretty good as it was, although from my reading of ICAO 9303 the Machine Readable Zone is supposed to have a white background. I'll freely admit I could be misinterpreting that out of caution, though. (And as luck would have it, we do actually have the same check digit on the second line.)

Arms shown here are for display / template purposes, and also for a chuckle.

[Danihel Txechescu]

After integrating much of the feedback -- as well as doing my best to make these ISO- and ICAO-compliant, I submit the following:
[...]
Document number is [Last Initial][4-digit Citizen #][Year of issue][Check digit][Version/edition, starting at A]. Check digit is a wee bit simpler than its ICAO counterpart: take the value of each non-check digit (or 1-26 if it's a letter), including the edition, sum each of them, square that, and sum up the value of those digits. If over 26, take each of the digits of that sum and sum those, at which point you really should be under 26. Assign a letter based on the value gotten.

As an example, mine is A055122-A. A = 1. 1+0+5+5+1+2+2+1=17. 17^2=289. 2+8+9=19. The 19th letter of the alphabet is S.

I don't particularly see a strong case of a check digit there, and feel that the last (name?) initial should definitely not be at the beginning or be there at all. I like the series (version/edition) at the beginning or in both the beginning and end:
* issuance series + citizen + year + serial, such as A05512200 or 05512200,
* issuance series + year + citizen + serial, such as A22055100 or 22055100.

In any case, I'm not married to any format. I'm just thinking that it needs to be easily tracked by the government (in a spreadsheet/database) and relatively straight-forward to generate.

I actually thought the design for the back was pretty good as it was, although from my reading of ICAO 9303 the Machine Readable Zone is supposed to have a white background. I'll freely admit I could be misinterpreting that out of caution, though. (And as luck would have it, we do actually have the same check digit on the second line.) [...]

I thought so too initially, but then I saw a bunch of actual passports (like my own) and cards (like visas I've been issued) that have a non-blank background in the MRZ. That opens up *a huge* opportunity to space the overall design. I guess the requirement is for it to have sufficient contrast.

Now, you're the one with the keen eye on design and you've probably seen my preference, but I'm not in love with the font for the captions on the front.

Maybe the two elements of Zone I can coexist at the same baseline level since they are of differing colors (might be a little tight).

I still believe that there should be both the Talossan/English captions for Sex, even when it's unspecified.

The Document number field is missing its Talossan translation.

All in all, I think it's brilliant.

[Marcel Eðo Pairescu Tafial, UrGP]

Two things:

@Mic'haglh Autófil  "Númerul dal Documenteu" is grammatically incorrect. "Documenteu" is masculine, so it would be "Númerul del Documenteu", but instead I'd suggest "Númeul da Documenteu" since it fits the style of the other labels, or its abbreviated form "N:reu da Doc." (yes, the abbreviated form of númerul is n:reu, don't ask me why.)

I still believe that there should be both the Talossan/English captions for Sex, even when it's unspecified.

If you mean that the sex should be listed in both Talossan and English, then linguistically there'd be no need for it. The Talossan and English words (maschcel ~ male, femnel ~ female) happen to have the same first letters, so listing it once would be sufficient. I havent read ICAO 9303 part 3 myself though, so maybe it's still necessary?

[Mic’haglh Autófil, SMC EiP]

I don't particularly see a strong case of a check digit there, and feel that the last (name?) initial should definitely not be at the beginning or be there at all. I like the series (version/edition) at the beginning or in both the beginning and end:
* issuance series + citizen + year + serial, such as A05512200 or 05512200,
* issuance series + year + citizen + serial, such as A22055100 or 22055100.

In any case, I'm not married to any format. I'm just thinking that it needs to be easily tracked by the government (in a spreadsheet/database) and relatively straight-forward to generate.

Fair enough! Sort of thing we can hammer out as the design progresses, no need to have it done immediately.

I actually thought the design for the back was pretty good as it was, although from my reading of ICAO 9303 the Machine Readable Zone is supposed to have a white background. I'll freely admit I could be misinterpreting that out of caution, though. (And as luck would have it, we do actually have the same check digit on the second line.) [...]

I thought so too initially, but then I saw a bunch of actual passports (like my own) and cards (like visas I've been issued) that have a non-blank background in the MRZ. That opens up *a huge* opportunity to space the overall design. I guess the requirement is for it to have sufficient contrast.

That does definitely open up some pathways for us. Let me play around with it some more then. We'll need to keep the "mostly transparent layers" going on, for reasons of contrast, but we have more options.

Now, you're the one with the keen eye on design and you've probably seen my preference, but I'm not in love with the font for the captions on the front.

That's far overselling me, but I appreciate it. ;D  Is there something specific about the font you don't like? I'm always open to changes, maybe if I know what seems off about it I can find a better option more easily.

Maybe the two elements of Zone I can coexist at the same baseline level since they are of differing colors (might be a little tight).

It will definitely be tight, but I can at least double-check to see if there isn't a way to make it work.

I still believe that there should be both the Talossan/English captions for Sex, even when it's unspecified.

The Document number field is missing its Talossan translation.

See below

All in all, I think it's brilliant.

Thank you!

Two things:

@Mic'haglh Autófil  "Númerul dal Documenteu" is grammatically incorrect. "Documenteu" is masculine, so it would be "Númerul del Documenteu", but instead I'd suggest "Númeul da Documenteu" since it fits the style of the other labels, or its abbreviated form "N:reu da Doc." (yes, the abbreviated form of númerul is n:reu, don't ask me why.)

I still believe that there should be both the Talossan/English captions for Sex, even when it's unspecified.

If you mean that the sex should be listed in both Talossan and English, then linguistically there'd be no need for it. The Talossan and English words (maschcel ~ male, femnel ~ female) happen to have the same first letters, so listing it once would be sufficient. I havent read ICAO 9303 part 3 myself though, so maybe it's still necessary?

Regarding point one: thank you for the correction! No better way to have a crash course in a language, I suppose  :P
On top of that, using the abbreviated form will permit me to put the English translation, since as it stands there isn't really enough space.

Regarding point two: ICAO 9303-5 (relevant for ID-1 size documents -- like these) reads:

As such, translation into English would yield the exact same initial, so we should really only use one.

[Caleb Frenibuerg]

After integrating much of the feedback -- as well as doing my best to make these ISO- and ICAO-compliant, I submit the following:

   

Please ignore that I look thoroughly pissed off in my passport photo LMAO

Dates updated to the correct DD.MM.YYYY format, but including the Talossan year.

Document number is [Last Initial][4-digit Citizen #][Year of issue][Check digit][Version/edition, starting at A]. Check digit is a wee bit simpler than its ICAO counterpart: take the value of each non-check digit (or 1-26 if it's a letter), including the edition, sum each of them, square that, and sum up the value of those digits. If over 26, take each of the digits of that sum and sum those, at which point you really should be under 26. Assign a letter based on the value gotten.

As an example, mine is A055122-A. A = 1. 1+0+5+5+1+2+2+1=17. 17^2=289. 2+8+9=19. The 19th letter of the alphabet is S.

I actually thought the design for the back was pretty good as it was, although from my reading of ICAO 9303 the Machine Readable Zone is supposed to have a white background. I'll freely admit I could be misinterpreting that out of caution, though. (And as luck would have it, we do actually have the same check digit on the second line.)

Arms shown here are for display / template purposes, and also for a chuckle.

I'm thinking the bunch of letters and numbers on the bottom could be a bit smaller. Maybe so it only takes up 1/4 of the card.

[Danihel Txechescu]

[...]
Now, you're the one with the keen eye on design and you've probably seen my preference, but I'm not in love with the font for the captions on the front.

That's far overselling me, but I appreciate it. ;D  Is there something specific about the font you don't like? I'm always open to changes, maybe if I know what seems off about it I can find a better option more easily.

I think a less blocky font would fit better here, and seems to be more often used in documents of this kind.

I still believe that there should be both the Talossan/English captions for Sex, even when it's unspecified.

[...] Regarding point two: ICAO 9303-5 (relevant for ID-1 size documents -- like these) reads:

As such, translation into English would yield the exact same initial, so we should really only use one.

Please see the Appendix A to part 5. It lists F / F for English/French, even though the same initials would be used in both M and F.

I've got to say: I'm absolutely delighted to see that we're discussing standards! Whatever the outcome, this is a whole new level of work!

[Mic’haglh Autófil, SMC EiP]

I'm thinking the bunch of letters and numbers on the bottom could be a bit smaller. Maybe so it only takes up 1/4 of the card.

I would agree, but if we're trying to go with the actual standards here -- which was Danihel's idea and I think he deserves credit there, it's a grült idea -- this is the size they're supposed to be.

I think a less blocky font would fit better here, and seems to be more often used in documents of this kind.

I can work with that. I have a few in mind, though not all of them have italic character sets for the English captions, so I'll see what I can do.

Please see the Appendix A to part 5. It lists F / F for English/French, even though the same initials would be used in both M and F.

That is weird, but a good observation. I guess I'll leave it up to the decision of the room.

I've got to say: I'm absolutely delighted to see that we're discussing standards! Whatever the outcome, this is a whole new level of work!

You and me both! Of course, I'm an engineer, so this sort of thing is...all too familiar, haha.

[Baron Alexandreu Davinescu]

I think these designs are looking amazing! One minor bit of feedback is that the different colored fonts on the obverse read like they should be grouped and read together, rather than following down the column. Took me a second to parse them. Maybe that's just because I'm looking at it on a screen, though?