BY JOSEPH A. NAUJOKAS, NAUJOKAS & ASSOCIATES,
ICMA STANDARDS REPRESENTATIVE
To see or not to see! That is the question! Card opacity is a big issue
now, in both marketing and standards. Lets take a look at card history
to see how we got here.
Seeing cards in card processing equipment is a requirement dating back
to the first use of card embossing equipment. As we added other machine
readable technologies, the requirement expanded to see the card in card
reading equipment, such as ATMs.
Card equipment initially used visible light optical sensors. Systems
quickly migrated to Infra Red (IR) sensors for the best reliability.
These worked well with the white PVC cards, so card opacity was not
a problem and was not even specified in the first ISO card standard
published in 1985.
Then in 1986, proposals emerged from France and Japan to reserve an
area of the card for possible future use of "watermarks" in
the plastic as a security feature. Their investigations found that sensors
were located in areas on the top and bottom card areas in existing equipment.
This left an area through the middle of the card as an opacity free
zone.
One theory for the reason that ATM manufacturers did not place sensors
in this zone is the "Citibank Magic Middle Card." Recall that
at one time Citibank was issuing these cards with a transparent zone
using their proprietary technology. Citibanks's goal to convince the
rest of the industry to follow their lead was not realized. So ATM designers
probably did not place sensors in this area to avoid any problems with
Citibank Cards, and as a hedge in case the "Magic Middle"
was adopted by the industry.
Test methods were also proposed at this time to measure opacity in
the opaque areas. The final test method only measured opacity in the
visible light range. The concept was accepted and implemented in the
first Test Method Standard. ISO 10373 which was completed in 1989. However,
publication was withheld until the test method criteria could be incorporated
into the revision of the basic card standards, ISO 7810, 7811 & 7813
in 1993.
The 1993 test method and criteria only dealt with visible light. At
the time, this was not a problem because card materials in use performed
reliably in both IR and visible light range. However, the next edition
of the test methods published in 1998 finally recognized the differences,
and a new test method was developed that specified and measured the
opacity in both the visible and IR light ranges. The specified areas
remained the same, leaving open the option of a transparent section
in the middle.
About this time, card designers and manufacturers began to look at
transparency as a means to attract cardholders. At least one card with
a transparent magnifier in the opacity free zone, (a two-time ICMA Élan
Award winner in 1999) is being issued by Chase Manhattan Bank in both
Visa and MasterCard formats.
Recognizing that visible light sensors in ATMs were virtually obsolete,
translucent cards with IR blockers began to appear. IR blockers were
already in use for some non-PVC cards whose material did not provide
sufficient opacity.
Although many problems were rumored with the opacity free zone and
the translucent cards, in actuality none were reported, and only minor
problems were found in a few refurbished self service gas pump equipment.
The ISO Working Group is now charged with the task of revising the
opacity standards to accommodate translucent cards while ensuring that
the specifications are clear and existing equipment will continue to
control ISO Standard compliant cards.
Kevin Tall of Eclipse Laboratories, Jerry Parsons of Mag-tek and I
will be discussing this issue in more detail at the upcoming ICMA U.S.
Spring Workshop being held in Nashville, Tennessee April 4-5. See page
8 for more information.
Editor's Note: Although the author is an officer of U.S. and international
standards committees and represents ICMA on these committees, the opinions
expressed here are the author's own.
Clarification: Mr. Naujokas' Standards Column on Patents and Standards
in the January/February issue of Card Manufacturing incorrectly used
the term "Intellectual Property Rights (IPR)" to refer to
patents. Patents are only one part of IPR and the discussion applied
only to patents.