That the kaywa reader is "free" could be discussed: it takes you to their landing-page before showing you the real URL! This could lead to Spam, spy ware and whatnot. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 62.84.192.238 (talk • contribs) 13:43, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at the link from the Kaywa home page pointing to their reader section http://reader.kaywa.com/ shows a simple diagram illustrating the point and decode process of the reader along with a link to the page of download options. They state the reader is free.

I don't have a phone to fully test the download process, but it all appears to be typical multiple page click-throughs to illustrate before providing multiple download path options. I see it requests registration for a pc to phone download option, asking for an email address, but that is pretty typical of software that is free, and still does not involve spending money to acquire it. 65.102.114.180 03:23, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Additional note: the kaywa reader is only a branded (older) version of the "free" i-nigma reader (install: http://i-nigma.mobi, web: http://i-nigma.com). Therefore it would make more sense to link the i-nigma reader instead the one branded by kaywa. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.214.255.255 (talk) 10:59, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

From Kaywa: The Kaywa Reader is free to use: it needs registration when downloaded on the PC/Mac Web, however it needs no registration when downloaded via your mobile phone.

Indeed there is a landing page for URL's which have been created freely. This is for two reasons: a) business model* - developing has a steep cost b) quality control: we think that it's helpful for the mobile novice, to tell him that the page he's accessing could be a 600KB page or also a 4MB mp3. Currently, we haven't gone further with this, but the warning has this important role.

• Business model: accessing commercial services through the Kaywa Reader is possible without an in-between-page.

There are two models: the QR Code API (http://api.qrcode.kaywa.com) or a web based solution based on the API. With the API or the web based solution you can create codes, change them and get live statistics. The API can be tested for free up to 5 codes.

We think it is the most open model possible and still having a viable business model. By the way all qrcodes on Kaywa services are completely free (short codes, short code URL and URL's)

Offline codes (SMS, Telephone, Text, Vcard) are free as well. There is no redirect, everything happens right on the phone. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.56.91.137 (talk) 20:25, 21 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

We could do with a comparison of Semacode, QR Code and any other alternatives. Could someone oblige, please? Andy Mabbett 11:56, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The QR Code for Wikipedia (EN) Main Page It cannot possibly be the whole page (content), so what is it, the URL? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.162.35.47 (talk) 11:00, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

According to the ZXing Decoder Online its the following, presumably the format for a link to Wikipedia:

MEBKM:URL:http\://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page;;

Feeding into Luna QRender or Kaywa the data format is simply the regular URL:

http://www.lunaqr.com/Generate.aspx

If you use the web favourite option you get the following:

MEBKM:TITLE:Main Page - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia;URL:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page;;

The correct escaping will be listed in the standards documentation, both seem to appear across the Internet. StevenMcCoy 12:29, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Best QR Code creation web site (http://www.qrcode gen.com): gen.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.45.19.150 (talk) 07:01, 7 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think this website should be added to the article: [1]

I am new to Wiki and someone said to put it in the discussion first. You can download the free software and create your own QR Codes (including business cards).

The QR Code could be big, but only if tonnes of people use it!

What do you think? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hopsta (talk • contribs) 19:16, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The free QR code generator is quite good: Online QR Code Maker.

I just tried to add another url to a QR Code generator, but it got rejected. My mistake, I think I should have discussed it here before trying to add it. It concerns urbanbookmarks.com. They seem to have added extra features to the QR Code concept, and they managed to gather all the information on how to install a decoder on your mobile. You need to register first though before you can generate the codes, but besides that I think they offer some interesting and relevant information. Apparently they are working on a corporate platform (non-free I suppose), but the website for end users is obviously free.

Anyhow, I just thought it was an interesting site, that's all. No hard feelings if you think different ;)

Pierredecoubertin (talk) 23:11, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please consider adding a link to this Comparison of QR Scanners and there spying habbits: http://qrscanners.wikidot.com Qrc-designer (talk) 13:55, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I believe [2] should be re-added to the article. The link was recently removed on the basis of self promotion and I have been asked "to discuss why the world (or at least Wikipedia) needs yet another link to a QR related external site" ^[1].

My original reply was posted in the wrong area. Thank you to the peer who pointed this out for me. I am new to wikipedia and it's taken quite a while to get to grips with edting / re-editing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.207.204.193 (talk) 18:14, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly let me point out that I did not conceal the fact that I am the owner of the website in question.

QRMe is a unique website that is free for anyone to use and was initially created because there was no central website that gave a comprehensive understanding of QR code technology that offered an insight to this technology from both a technical and layman's perspective. The website is currently receiving over 9,000 hits per month after only being online a matter of months so my intention was not of self promotion simply to generate traffic but to make people aware that a lot more information can be found on QR codes.

There is no other website on the net today that is focused entirely on QR codes. News, articles explaining QR code technology in laymans terms, videos showing the use of QR codes in the real world and a forum covering all aspects of QR codes. I'm sure you'll agree that if you visit and review the website you'll come back with a better understanding of QR codes and their uses. There is enough content on the website to keep you occupied for quite a number of hours.

Registration is required if users would like a QR code generated as the map tracking feature needs to be linked to an account in order to show the user his/her own qr code scans.

May I also point out that the website is a personal site that I have created.

Should this website have been removed by a peer or should it be re-added to the article based on the fact it is an invaluable resource ?

Thank you for your time.

Regards Ian. Admin. QRMe

Qrme (talk) 18:04, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi and welcome to Wikipedia. Wikipedia articles can over time collect long lists of external links and it can become very difficult to separate the wheat from the chaff. Our readers are aware of web directories and search engines and will likely use those to search for additional web pages. As wikipedia is an encyclopedia and not a web directory or search engine, generally speaking the addition of external links is not really very helpful in furthering the goals of Wikipedia--that being to write high quality encyclopedia articles. If you have knowledge of QR codes it would be much more useful to Wikipedia and its readers if you could add good well sourced (see WP:RS) information to this article. The Wikipedia community has developed a set of guidelines for the inclusion of external links in articles which you can read at WP:EL. Thanks, —Jeremy (talk) 20:16, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would be willing to bet money that his well-sourced article would include a reference back to his web site, thus circumventing the removal of the link to his site.

Boteman (talk) 23:13, 1 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The images used to illustrate Reed–Solomon error correction are very disturbing. A good illustration would be a QR Code that has been randomly altered. Instead, in the provided illustrations, the lower-right quarter is intact, and the other quarters have been altered in calculated patterns. That is not error correction. Nicolas1981 (talk) 03:42, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. In addition: The coded text is "Morden", which is German for "to murder". I removed the example, until there is a better one. --ISBN (talk) 20:53, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I would create one if I were not so busy right now Nicolas1981 (talk) 05:48, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Haha, I guess you've never heard of Morden. 155.198.65.73 (talk) 17:59, 30 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't check what happened between the time of the above comments and today, but I don't think the present text is very meaningful. Firstly, it says that it is 'level L' correction (up to 7% recovery), while the images have much more than 7% of their content changed. This is not consistent. Secondly, I tried scanning the images with two separate readers (Nokia and Android), and neither recognizes the distorted images. (Covering 10-15 pixels is about the limit, so it seems.) I am therefore removing the images from the article; reproduced below. If someone feels that the images do belong in that article, then the article should describe clearly how many % of the pixels are changed and why other parts of the decoding chain stop working far below this distortion level. Han-Kwang (t) 12:59, 30 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just wanted to chime in to say you guys are correct that the images aren't good examples. There are certain regions of the QR code around the finder patterns which hold critical format information. They have a separate error correction mechanism. However, these regions were completely changed in the examples, rendering them unreadable. (That is, the error rate in this special regions was 50% or more, well above correctable limits.) srowen (talk) 16:41, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Device section is advertising a fee-applyed product/software called "QuickMark". QR code is an open format, and the article should not by that means promote anything that has a price tag! There are many, many smaller softwares to do the job for free. What's going on with the champs who make up stuff like this :( And no, I don't wish to register at wikipedia. Please don't notify me every time. 89.166.103.110 (talk) 20:28, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just ran across a discussion on this on NPR, and while only partially paying attention I heard an American company is introducing this to the US, but developing a proprietary version of this in an attempt to monetize (make money). Anyone have any details on this?Haverberg (talk) 18:52, 28 May 2009 (UTC) ... Microsoft's "TAG" (http://tag.microsoft.com/consumer/index.aspx) is a different proprietary 2D 'bar' code system using colors. The examples I've seen use black-white-cyan-magenta-yellow as the main colors (easiest to get 'pure' from inkjet printers, I suppose). Their system does not code a URL directly, but references their server site, which then points you to the web site. This is similar to how the 'scan cat' and Tiny URL systems work. The server-in-the-middle means that they can capture marketing data (which they can sell) as you scan. --Paul E Musselman —Preceding unsigned comment added by Paulmmn (talk • contribs) 19:50, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

For instructional purposes, this would seem to be a useful QR code generator to include in the article. It lets you choose from phone number, SMS, map location, URL, MeCARD, and ASCII text inputs. There's no registration required.

http://www.mskynet.com/static/maestro

— Wdfarmer (talk) 02:58, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I also wrote one recently and released it under GPLv3. It is limited to 8 bit encoding (not numeric, alphanumeric, nor Kanji) at the moment, but is small and fast and runs on an Arduino.

http://github.com/tz1/qrduino

The code is optimized but it is fairly transparent (250+ lines of C for the frame, about 500 for the encoding process).

Tz1 (talk) 05:13, 27 February 2010 (UTC)thomas-at-mich.com[reply]

It would be interesting to know why the online QR code generators create different code pictures. Although I asume that the data ouput would be the same. 81.189.153.130 (talk) 10:10, 28 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I, too, would like to know how the same URL input results in different looking QR code images from different generators. My suspicion is that each site generates a QR image that (transparently?) tracks hits back through its site before delivering the requester to the desired site.

To answer your question, most encoders are now employing either an internal code based url shortener, or an external url shortener like bit.ly or goo.gl. That effectively means that while you are inputting the same value, the output is a randomized value. Please note that there are multiple reasons to do this which have nothing to do with the ability to track your actions, although that can be one of the reasons for the technique. Mseguin (talk) 17:45, 7 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Boteman (talk) 23:40, 1 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have changed the chapter about the license to a more objective one. I have visited the Denso Wave Website, which seems to have been updated with a more clearer statement about that the QR Code is license free.

Of course, the ISO organsisation is taking money to sell the specifications information, but the use of QR COde (generating or reading) does not produce any further cost for licensing to anyone.

ISO is generally taking money for ALL of their specifiactions, not only for QR Code.

The japaneese web site is stating that QR Code is public domain, but who can read japaneese. I am missing that phrase in the english translation, this would make this point much more clear...

Lightgunner (talk) 15:59, 25 January 2010 (UTC) Update: Lightgunner (talk) 16:04, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In the ISO standard as well as other places they use their own terminology:

"Module" refers to the black or white blocks, e.g. the smallest code is 21 modules wide. "Version" refers to the size. Version N will be 4n+17 modules wide. "Level" refers to the error correction level.

Tz1 (talk) 05:37, 27 February 2010 (UTC)tz[reply]

Although QR Codes can be large and valid, most smartphones will not properly process even a perfect image beyond a certain size. Different devices will have different limitations.

Tz1 (talk) 05:37, 27 February 2010 (UTC)tz[reply]

It probably should read MAY not produce identical marks.

It is an ISO specification, and there are some ambiguities, however there are a very limited number of sources for a difference, but generally not if the input stream is encoded in the same way with the same parameters. A different Version will have have more or less padding, some strings can be coded more or less efficiently, e.g. "123" can be a number, alphanumeric, or 8bit, and you can mix encodings within the same data bitstream. There are some ambiguities in the masking algorithm (e.g. how do you count edges when determining the pattern is good or bad) so it is possible two masks will be chosen by different implementations. The ECC for a data bitstream will always be the same. The unmasked pattern for the data+ecc will always be the same.

Also, because there is error correction, it is possible to produce actual coding errors from the generator which will be corrected by the reader, so testing a generator can be difficult.

Tz1 (talk) 05:37, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

How widely used is this service? Is this a worldwide phenomena? Can mobile phones in the UK use this sort of thing, especially the ones that have internet capability?

Some clarifications would help on this article.

88.105.4.108 (talk) 15:50, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

> How widely used is this service? Is this a worldwide phenomena? Can mobile phones in the UK use this sort of thing, especially the ones that have internet capability?

Answers to these questions and many of the previous questions can be found at 2d-code.co.uk

If it helps and you would like a definative answer to a specific question please feel free to email me roger (at) 2d-code (dot) co (dot) uk there is very little I don't know about 2d barcodes! Roger Smolski.

86.0.255.191 (talk) 03:09, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

QR codes have been increasing in worldwide popularity, especially in the last 5 years. In countries, like Korea, they are highly prevalent in advertising for brands. Most recently, Tesco created a virtual shopping experience using QR codes, outside a subway station. In the US, many brands have been using QR codes, some have seen a great of success, while others have been failures, due to a number of factors. Most uses have been to send a user to piece of content, whether it be a website, image, video or music. DigitalFlashNYC (talk) 21:20, 9 August 2011 (UTC)DigitalFlashNYC Example of usage includes PetHub.com where a QR Code is etched on a pet ID tag that links to a free profile. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.16.43.189 (talk) 04:57, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The following was added by Frank C. Hudetz (User:Fhudetz)

The idea of scanning a bar code which would then connect you to a URL was conceived and patented by a U.S. Commercial Printer, Frank C. Hudetz in 2001. The Hudetz patent (USPTO # 6,199,048)was issued in 2001 and assigned to the Neomedia Technologies Company. It is used today by many companies who desire to use multiple codes as a marketing or enterprise solution

Not sure if writing about yourself still violates WP policy, but I've slimmed it down and rephrased it to be more NPOV. --Daev (talk) 00:08, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There is a factual problem with the following

In 2011 a games developer company called Media Molecule released a game called LittleBigPlanet 2 which had QR Code technology intergrated into it. You would look for the QR code on the games dedicated website, lbp.me, then you would hold the QR code up to the camera and the game would automatically take you to that level. (read the wikipedia post on LittleBigPlanet 2 for better understanding.)

The problem being that it is still 2010

115.128.28.94 (talk) 11:56, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

HOw about adding links for "QR Code generating sites" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.82.15.222 (talk) 17:06, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm new to Wikipedia and don't feel comfortable making this change at this time but...

I think a section describing innovative use by business or government would be helpful. Two examples that come to mind:

• New York City's plan to use QR Codes on building permits. This will put a QR Code on the permit that is required to be posted at a construction site. Anybody could then use that code to quickly verify the building permit, look up public information related to that permit, quickly call the appropriate enforcement agency regarding the permit, etc. See http://techcrunch.com/2011/02/22/nyc-qr-codes-on-buildings/

• Certain airlines in the US support a paperless boarding pass. When you use a paperless boarding pass, you get something that you can display on your smartphone that includes a QR code. This QR code gets scanned when you would normally have to present your boarding pass (e.g. at the security checkpoint and when boarding the airplane). See http://www.tsa.gov/approach/tech/paperless_boarding_pass_expansion.shtm

• QR Codes: Driving Sales and Engaging Customers on Television http://www.d2analytics.com/2011/05/20/27/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.44.63.238 (talk) 01:14, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Steve609 (talk) 14:33, 26 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe I'm overlooking something, but how the hell should a code consisting of 32 x 32 bits (as in the example image) be able to store thousands of bytes?? 80.187.96.91 (talk) 16:07, 4 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The capacity varies by the size of the image: QR code capacity table. A version 1 (23x23 modules at level L == 35 alpha numeric):

The largest version 40 can handle multiple kilobytes (177x177 modules at level L == 4296 alphanumeric characters). Here is a mid-sized code, although I'm not sure of the level:

Autopilot (talk) 00:00, 5 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What exact characters can be represented by a "numeric" or "alphanumeric" code. In particular are the colon, slash and dot needed to represent URLs included in the "alphanumeric" code or does the "binary" code have to be used? I also see a reference in one of the links to using uppercase being more efficiant than mixed case but I can't find any info on this in any size tables. 130.88.108.187 (talk) 11:54, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see a freely available source for this either, but the exact alphanumeric character set is as follows: the digits 0-9, upper-case letters A-Z, space, and the symbols '$', '%', '*', '+', '-', '.', '/', and ':'. That includes the important URL characters, but no lower-case letters, which may or may not be a problem. Bobmath (talk) 16:08, 10 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What is the difference and which one does this article primerally describe? 130.88.108.187 (talk) 12:27, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

All symbols shown in the article are model 2. Model 1 symbols look similar, but lack version information (the blue blocks in File:QR_Code_Structure_Example_2.svg) and alignment patterns (the smaller bull's-eye near the lower-right corner. A different sort of pattern is used for a similar purpose). Bobmath (talk) 15:51, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Design QR looks to be the brand name of just one of several companies producing customised QR codes, should not the name of the section be changed so as not to endorse only the one company? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.25.49.7 (talk) 20:51, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any proof of "Design QR" being a brand name?

There is need for a design qr / custom qr section as these are getting quite popular. There are plenty of hits on google. I suggest a separate article on design QRs.

Qrc-designer (talk) 12:33, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(cur | prev) 10:36, 30 July 2011 RHaworth (talk | contribs) (11,440 bytes) (→Overview: custom and extreme codes have not emerged far enough yet) (undo)

is there some criteria for when something has emerged far enough? 357,000 hits for "custom qr code" is far enough for me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Qrc-designer (talk • contribs) 08:09, 31 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There are also two million hits for "wet paper bag." I'm just sayin'. Bobmath (talk) 14:22, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That's an idiom. Of course there are plenty of hits for it. You have to compare it to "wet qr code". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Qrc-designer (talk • contribs) 08:47, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

{{mergefrom|Extreme QR code}}

This article was created today with very little information, no references and very little room for expansion. Could probably be included in this article as a section... Nikthestoned 14:59, 28 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I agreed with the suggestion of merger, as extreme QR is a fringe term and the description was fragmented and unsupported. Unfortunately, this is an emerging space and there are no real professional references to cite. What I did was to update the section on the main qr_code article to elaborate a bit on styled qr. I am still searching for citations to support what is currently only original research on scanner efficacy (between active and passive scanners) and the history of styled qr. I apologize that I am new to this. I was not responsible for the original extreme qr post, am just trying to help bring it sensibly within the context of the master qr_code article. Mseguin (talk) 17:39, 7 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Mseguin -- the new section that you have added on "Styled QR" has too much original research and self promotion. Please remove the inline self links and non-encyclopedic language, and find some references (such as the ones linked in the "Error correction" section on artistic QR codes) that support the claims in the section. -- Autopilot (talk) 11:18, 7 August 2011 (UTC) Editors, will comply. I am brand new to this, so bear with me. The content is verifiable, and I believe valuable, but I will attempt to comply. It would be valuable to be able to use the image embed so I don't have to link out. As for citations, well, i am literally pioneering the field, so it is hard to find non self-promotional references, but I will try. Thanks for the guidance. Mseguin (talk) 15:49, 7 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Very few people use the term "Styled QR" or have ever heard of it. There are 253 hits for it on google right now (phrase search). In contrast there are 223,000 hits for "custom qr code" and 76,700 hits for "design qr code" (more common in europe?). I will change the heading. Qrc-designer (talk) 08:59, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

None of this section belongs on this site. Anything that actually says "There are no references available to cite for this original research." quite clearly violates WP:NOR. The whole thing seems to be self-promotional, and the SPA nature of one of the writing accounts makes me very suspicious indeed. Please don't re-add this section without further discussion. Absconded Northerner (talk) 10:19, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you're trying to encode URLs into the smallest-sized possible QR code image, you can stick to the following to gain a 30% increase in storage efficiency. Or in "plain english" - use all UPPERCASE.

'0'=> 0, '1'=> 1, '2'=> 2, '3'=> 3, '4'=> 4, '5'=> 5, '6'=> 6, '7'=> 7, '8'=> 8, '9'=> 9, 'A'=>10, 'B'=>11, 'C'=>12, 'D'=>13, 'E'=>14, 'F'=>15, 'G'=>16, 'H'=>17, 'I'=>18, 'J'=>19, 'K'=>20, 'L'=>21, 'M'=>22, 'N'=>23, 'O'=>24, 'P'=>25, 'Q'=>26, 'R'=>27, 'S'=>28, 'T'=>29, 'U'=>30, 'V'=>31, 'W'=>32, 'X'=>33, 'Y'=>34, 'Z'=>35, ' '=>36, '$'=>37, '%'=>38, '*'=>39, '+'=>40, '-'=>41, '.'=>42, '/'=>43, ':'=>44.

120.151.160.158 (talk) 07:06, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I've added that information to the article. Note that some parts of the URL might be case-sensitive. This depends on the particular web server involved. Bobmath (talk) 15:41, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I notice that some codes do not work on my iPhone, and others do exciting things. My guess is that codes sometimes have one of the following prefixes to activate the groove? Someone should elaborate on whether this is the case, and if so, what all these things do and how they're encoded.

MECARD, MEMORY, BIZCARD, VCARD, MEBKM, URLTO, SMS, SMSTO, MAILTO, MATMSG, SMTP, GEO, NAVG, TEL

emails with @

web addresses with http(s) in front

I've seen "EZ" mentioned as well (in conjunction with emails&URLs) - no idea what that means.

I've also seen mapping, tweets, events, and a range of other things - not sure if they're some standard, or just web-redirects to more info tho.

120.151.160.158 (talk) 07:11, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, I don't know of an authoritative source for that, but they have collected some information at the ZXing project. Bobmath (talk) 15:38, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I recently saw a QR code in a Commercial advertising a Duncan Hines cake mix, designed to be paused (for those with DVRs) and scanned. It also relies on the viewer being curious enough to scan it. I was. It brought me to a webpage about the product. I also saw one on one of my favorite crime dramas, CSI:NY. In the episode "Vacation Getaway". It appeared on a view of Danny Messer's ID badge. I scanned it and found it said "NYPD Crime Scene Investigator". It was an Easter egg like when characters speak in another language and don't say what you expect. I don't know if these could be considered notable uses to put in the article but I thought I'd share. 75.56.54.99 (talk) 16:14, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

One way is briefly described in the middle of the uses section. The methods a device can use to scan a QR code should be described in detail somewhere in this article. Is a camera the only way, or do attachable scanners exist? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.222.187.31 (talk) 10:28, 7 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"QR codes intentionally obscure and compress their contents and intent to humans" This is not my area of expertise, but this sentence makes no sense. Gramatically it is a jumble, but there also seems to be an implication that QR codes are capable of independent thought. Please can someone with appropriate knowledge clean it up? Theeurocrat (talk) 10:02, 15 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I simply removed that statement, as it doesn't seem necessary. I think people are familiar with the idea that malware can be hidden in something that appears innocuous, which seems to be the intent. Bobmath (talk) 20:46, 15 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There seems to be two main topics to this article: the "technical" and the "general". The current organization emphasizes the technical, and the sources are all technical. But if anyone does a search for QR codes, you'll discover that 95% of the articles or news stories cover the general areas and their use in society, not the technical.

A recent survey found that while 81% of college students owned a smartphone with that same number having seen QR codes, only 21% of them knew how to scan them. Reading this article, assuming they got past the first section, they still wouldn't know. College students!

I suggest we consolidate all the techy stuff into one section called "Technical aspects", with the same subsections, and some other more general sections up front, explaining the subject in more common language.--Wikiwatcher1 (talk) 07:56, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No response means be bold! Bobmath (talk) 15:26, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Would a section for such trivia be appropriate? Such as: largest temporary, permanent, moving etc. (in the realm of "size", but I'm sure there are other "interesting" uses). The disclaimer being that I'm a member of a group that lays claim to Worlds Largest (not that I can update the article, but I'm wondering if there is hope). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Acklenx (talk • contribs) 20:50, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Trivia sections are generally discouraged--see WP:TRIVIA for more information. Any claims added to the article of the largest etc. would also need to be cited with a reliable secondary source that is independent of the people making the claim.—Jeremy (talk) 23:04, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am troubled by Wtuvell's edit that created QR code#Next Steps. It places content in some illustrations and was added by the illustrations' creator. WP:COI I don't know what to do, but the addition seems a bit off. It's not really adding text to the article. The information is dense, and it may be offering too much detail (reference manual, tutorial, how to). It's sort of using WP to publish some external links. It just feels a bit odd. Any comments? Glrx (talk) 19:46, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Storing the images as PNG also makes them very difficult to reuse, internationalize or edit in any meaningful way. CAT:SVG would be better, but better still would be to merge the non-WP:OR content into the body of the main article text. -- Autopilot (talk) 01:47, 8 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see how it's a conflict of interest -- the new images don't seem to be self-promotional at all. I don't understand the comment about external links; the images are simply citing authoritative sources. I don't see anything that I would consider original research. It seems to fall under WP:Technical#Add a concrete example. I agree that there's an awful lot of text in them that would be better as article text, and SVG would probably be a better choice of format. Bobmath (talk) 18:30, 8 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

An image used in this article, File:Qr-1.svg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests January 2012 What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 02:49, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There is a lot of criticism about QR codes, and they fact that they are an utterly useless marketing invention. Very similar to cuecat, they serve a purpose that no one wanted. http://ernestkoe.com/2011/09/08/qr-codes-are-stupid/ http://www.imediaconnection.com/article_full.aspx?id=30267 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Allcarwiki (talk • contribs) 02:19, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

They're not a marketing invention, they were devised for inventory tracking. The marketing use is kind of silly, I tend to agree, basically a newfangled secret decoder ring. Bobmath (talk) 06:08, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to suggest my comparison list of qr code scanners to be included in the article. Maybe a whole new section about scanner programs for smartphones? The link is: Comparison of QR code scanners the lists are editable for everybody and have a slight focus on user privacy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fkjt79 (talk • contribs) 14:07, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

An image used in this article, File:Wikipedia QR Code.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests February 2012 What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Wikipedia QR Code.jpg) This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 22:08, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

From the Standards section, "NTT DoCoMo has established de facto standards for the encoding of URLs, contact information, and several other data types." with a reference that links to the company website, not a real citation. I'm not an expert, can anyone weigh in on this statement's validity?DdDave (talk) 20:07, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is a trivial mention of the "world's largest QR code", which is being inserted by a user who's only edits have been to insert this promotional material. The material inserted is relying on primary sources, and doesn't belong in a "Uses" section, especially preceding the actual uses of a QR code. - SudoGhost 20:34, 20 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Agree. It's enough to simply mention that they can be any size, tiny or large, so long as a camera can read the image. And it really has nothing to do with "Uses." --Wikiwatcher1 (talk) 21:46, 20 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Agree with removal. Articles may include trivia, but this trivia about largest isn't interesting enough. Glrx (talk) 20:46, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, they're cute and everything, but I think we have enough examples now. Also, I'm curious -- how many decoders can actually handle something like File:Wikipedia artistic QR code.png? Bobmath (talk) 17:00, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I just tried that one with the free app Scan by QR Code City for the iPad, and it had no problem at all with that one. I cannot say the same for the largest one still on the main page.Victor Engel (talk) 04:18, 22 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I deleted the two exotic ones as WP:UNDUE. The purpose of the code is not art, and I not sure that the sources discussing artistic codes are all that reliable. Ref 21 is a blog; ref 22 might be a blog and it talks about QR might go mainstream. The artistic rendering should not be the first image in the Uses section; if they stick around, then should be down at the bottom in a pop culture section (where blog images might be appropriate). I might leave the black and white one with Wikipedia written through it as a demonstration of error correction (and, appropriately enough, it is in the error correction section); I still have a trouble with it because it uses ECC with intentional damage rather than incidental damage. We don't have an incidentally damaged illustration where the ECC is doing its real job. Glrx (talk) 17:34, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Bobmath, plenty of decoders could decode the artistic one. We tested it on almost every scanner. I'm not sure why an artistic one was a problem. We realized Wikipedia did not have an example of custom or artistic QR codes, so we decided to donate you one. Artistic QR codes are beginning to rise Glrx, but I understand if you want to give it more time. We just thought we could fill a need and let everyone be aware that tampering with the aesthetics of the code is possible and is already going on throughout the QR industry. ARTQR (talk) 19:47, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There are many online examples of customized QR codes. --Wikiwatcher1 (talk) 19:58, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That there is, but we focus more on artistic QR codes. We gave the Wikipedia a whole space theme, so if it was the design you don't like we could make a new one Glrx and Bobmath. Here are a few examples of artistic QR codes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Qrezy (talk • contribs) 20:18, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's quite nice, really, except for the word "Wikipedia" slapped across the middle. But displaying your services on Wikipedia is toying with WP:COI. Bobmath (talk) 23:15, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I removed "Wikipedia" from the code. Our intentions were to simply to show that QR codes are also becoming a form of interactive art work. We in no way wanted there to be some type of conflict of interest. I hope you understand. ARTQR (talk) 23:40, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I would revert this group of edits. First part is unsourced. Second part uses involved company website and some apparent blogs. Addition is also more prominent in the section than it should be. Glrx (talk) 03:22, 3 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to add:

"On the 13th of June 2012 a British company Ensygnia Ltd was granted a patent by the UK patent office^[2] which covered usage of a visual cryptogram for a range of actions including registration, log-in, payment authorisation and shopping^[3][4]."

My thoughts are that the UK patent office is a sufficiently robust source in it own right even without supporting articles from two leading publications. A patent is not a question of news, it is fact and facts are relevant from an encyclopedic perspective. I don't believe WP:UNDUE has any relevance as this relates to giving a view (e.g. flat Earth) undue weight. This is not a view it is a fact relating directly to QR usage.

The sources cited are a leading UK SME publication and mobile magazine. The sources quoted are at least of similar caliber to this article cited as a reference: http://phys.org/news/2010-11-phone-friendly-codes-ads.html which is cited as suitable reference. Would this be a better source: http://www.mobile-apps-news.com/category/scanlife as the journalistic content is higher?

I'd value other editors constructive thoughts on this.

Thanks. Amicaveritas (talk) 17:37, 29 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose. Recent patent would not have much impact on QR code. Patents are essentially self-published. Second reference is built from press releases (that is, it just quotes the company), so it lacks independence. The third ref is a dead link. Glrx (talk) 19:22, 2 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

>> I don't believe how recent a patent is has any impact on encyclopedic relevance. The fact that the patent is for new usage (and as far as I can see the only significant patent in this field) is highly relevant to any one researching this field. A point of reference for research is an encyclopedia. Self publication and indeed a company's own website are valid sources for information; while I'd understand your concerns referencing only a press release the fact that the story has been picked up by relevant journalists adds to weight. The final link should have been: http://mobileretailmagazine.com/content/ensygnia-launches-patened-onescan-solution. If you Google there are others. The tone of the entry is neutral, so this is a legitimate good faith addition. Amicaveritas (talk) 10:37, 3 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've requested a third opinion. Material has been reinserted without a consensus. There's a patent, and there are press releases, but there isn't any independent indication of importance. WP:UNDUE Glrx (talk) 22:22, 18 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

​​

Response to third opinion request (QR Code Usage):

I am responding to a third opinion request for this page. I have made no previous edits on QR code and have no known association with the editors involved in this discussion. The third opinion process is informal and I have no special powers or authority apart from being a fresh pair of eyes.

It seems that the dispute here is over two issues: reliability of sources and undue emphasis. So I'll try to address both of these questions. First, with respect to the sources, we have the following: A patent A press release published on a site that publishes press releases Another article which quotes liberally from the same press release. The patent is a primary source, and could be used to prove the point that the company has a patent. Use of primary sources is discouraged, though, because generally speaking, they require interpretation. That's what secondary sources do—they take primary sources, analyze them, draw conclusions, and then publish their analysis and conclusions. Wikipedia generally wants to use secondary sources because the mere fact that the patent exists, for example, isn't that interesting, and interpreting what the patent means would be WP:OR. The two press release articles amount to self-published sources. One doesn't get the impression from reading the articles that there was any analysis—rather, the articles seem to repeat what the company that issued the press release said without any serious analysis. So they amount to WP:SPS. If you read WP:SPS, it specifically calls out patents as generally not reliable sources. It also gives some fairly stringent criteria for when SPS can be used that I think rule these sources out. The two that I think are key are: the material is neither unduly self-serving nor an exceptional claim; and the article is not based primarily on such sources. Here we are talking about a paragraph, not a whole article, but the paragraph is based entirely on such sources, so I think the caveats I've mentioned above apply. The paragraph also reads as an ad, so I think the caveat about "self-serving" also applies. Moving on to the question of undue emphasis, what's being described here is an application of QR codes to a particular problem. There are a number of such descriptions in the article, but there are differences that I think are worth paying attention to. First, applications described in the article all seem to be actual applications, not possible future applications. Secondly, they don't seem to get paragraphs of their own. In comparison to other applications mentioned in the article, this particular application seems to get much more emphasis, which is pretty much the definition of WP:UNDUE. So my inclination is to say that, first, the sources won't cut it—we need to see someone talking about this application in use in the real world, not a patent or promotional literature from the company. On that basis, the text should be removed. Second, if at some future date a reliable source is identified, the text should be shorter. Look at the Use In Retail section for an example—the emphasis on this application should be no larger than any of those. But just to be clear, I do not mean that the text could be added back in if it's shorter. You need to do both: make it shorter, less like an advertisement, and find a reliable source to cite.Abhayakara (talk) 00:58, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Currently, the article has a picture with this text:

Version 40 (177×177). Content: "Version 40 QR Code can contain up to 1852 chars. ..." (a total of 1,264 characters of ordinary/ASCII text, taken from an early version of this Wikipedia article)

"taken from an early version of this Wikipedia article"!? This is the worst type of reference in a wikipedia article that I have seen to date. First, these are empty words, because it does not gives any useful or meaningful information about the image. Second, referencing old versions is definitely a bad practice, self-referencing is a bad practice too. Combining these two bad practices in a single phrase is just ridiculous.

177.176.86.243 (talk) 19:55, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Walter's fourth panel, with various lightnesses of cyan, also includes grey [spots], but the panel doesn't seem to tell anything about the significance of the grey [spots], nor the significance of the various lightnesses (values?) of cyan. It's not easy to edit these panels, nor to add content, unfortunately. I must say that they are very impressive pieces of work, indeed! URL for the panel in question: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:QRCode-4-Levels,Masks.png> I apologize for the format of this comment, but have limited energy (I'm 76). Best regards, Nikevich 17:32, 25 September 2012 (UTC) (I have had DHCP for some time, btw.)

It should be QR Code and not QR code. "QR Code" is the right format fitting to the Denso Wave patent/trademark applications — Preceding unsigned comment added by Uriel Peled (talk • contribs) 08:14, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment. The article was moved from "QR Code" to "QR code" in March 2011. There's a redirect at QR Code, so users will find the content. Generally, WP's house style (WP:MOSCAP) avoids capitalization. Although "QR Code" might be viewed as a proper name (WP:NAMECAPS), WP usage is inconsistent but often downcases a trailing generic word in some names: for example, Morse code, Golay code, Hamming code and Chebyshev polynomials. There are capped generics: Aztec Code and MSI Barcode (but "MSI code" could also be used for MSI barcode / Modified Plessey). Looking at Aztec Code, the body text of the article often uses "Aztec code" instead of "Aztec Code". The majority use in the QR code article is "QR Code", but a few "QR code" also exist. The article also uses phrases such as "QR readers" (no "Code") and "Some 58% of those users scanned a QR or bar code from their home". If we go to the Denso-Wave website, http://www.qrcode.com/en/index.html, it uses "QR code": "The QR code was a kind of two dimensional symbology". I think a case can be made for "QR Code", but I'm indifferent. Glrx (talk) 16:27, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The most informative answer i could have hoped for :), thanks Glrx! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Uriel Peled (talk • contribs) 17:41, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've restored the "Use in desktop computers"[3] section which somebody else deleted.

Why do you wish to remove potentially useful information? It is not "speculation" to say that "the appearance of free tools for decoding from image files or webcams, for the Windows, MacOS, and Linux desktop operating systems, makes this standard useable as a backup method for storing private data, such as passwords or encryption keys." It is a statement of fact. It is not "advertising" to substantiate this statement by providing references to examples of such free software. It is neither stated nor implied that these examples are the only or best software for the purpose, merely that they exist, in order to demonstrate the truth of the statement.

If Microsoft and Apple provided QR Code readers as part of their commercial operating systems, which people have to pay for, would it constitute "advertising" to point that out? Since they apparently do not, why is it "advertising" to point out that other organisations provide software for that purpose at no cost, when the supposed non-availability of such was previously said to "make this standard unpalatable as a backup method for storing private data"?

You complain that the meaning has been "flipped" from the previous version. Indeed it has, because the supposed facts ("lack of functioning tools") on which the previous conclusion ("unpalatable as a backup method") was based have also flipped. It was in order to demonstrate this alteration of relevant facts, that I provided the references which you derided as "advertising".

You really can't have it both ways, unless you claim that conclusions should be unalterable, even when the facts on which they were originally based have changed. In which case, you have bigger problems than one paragraph in a Wikipedia article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.10.185.203 (talk) 10:14, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links don't belong in the body of the article, and all the section really said was that you can download something; that's doesn't really seem to be relevant unless some third-party reliable sources can be cited showing that this is relevant. I think the same could also be said of the part saying it "makes this standard useable as a backup method for storing private data, such as passwords or encryption keys". Yes, it could be used this way, but that seemed more like a "how to" suggestion more than anything, are there any reliable sources that suggest this is a common usage? - SudoGhost 12:11, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

WP is not a howto guide, and WP does not engage in WP:OR. If material is challenged, then reliable sources are needed to back up the statements. As it stands, this material seems inappropriate for WP. It should not be reinserted unless a consensus for it is reached on this talk page. I will view SudoGhost's comments as a WP:3O. Glrx (talk) 21:41, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have been stymied in adding a section involving an implementation of QR codes called 'munzee'. It is a game similar to geocaching in that it uses GPS to find a location but differs in that once the hidden object is found a QR code is scanned to record the find and obtain points. It is undeniably a real game, has existed for about a year and has over 50,000 registered players; it has been written about in several well-known blogs about geocaching. On blogger has been writing about the activity since 2008 and the other has an average of 800 visitors per day to his website. The fact that this activity is relatively new and is an electronic-based game means that sources about the activity are primarly electronic, so the fact that the sources are blogs should not disqualify them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GaryJGolden (talk • contribs) 20:46, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not questioning its existance, I have no doubt it is real. What I'm questioning is its relevance to this article. You'll notice that geocaching only has a single word in the Global Positioning System amongst other uses, not an entire section, and that's an activity that has plenty of reliable sources. However, in the overall topic of GPS, geocaching isn't something that needs to be detailed. The same parallel is true here, the difference is that this activity doesn't seem to have the reliable sources to support mentioning it in the article. Blogs are not reliable sources in that anyone can create a blog and discuss a topic, so it isn't a reliable method of determining what is WP:DUE in an article. - SudoGhost 21:06, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

So, is it your suggestion that a separate article be created? I was of the opinion that, while the activity is significant enough to warrant mention, it wasn't quite significant enough for its own article and that a brief mention in an article about the technology on which the activity is based was more appropriate. I've also found that the Boy Scouts of America has made use of the activity at one of its conferences and so their press release about it could be used as a source. The BSA describes a game to "earn points by capturing munzees, which are special QR codes that need to be scanned with a smart phone"; would this be considered reliable enough? - User_talk:GaryJGolden —Preceding undated comment added 15:48, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Judging from the sources that were presented, and what I was able to find online, the subject itself is not notable. However, it also does not belong in this article. This article is about QR codes in general, but that doesn't mean that anything that uses QR codes also belongs in this article, the use of QR codes as a specific game is not relevant enough for mention in this article. It would be WP:UNDUE to give such a minor aspect of usage so much (or any) attention in an article about the QR code. - SudoGhost 15:53, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The game does not seem relevant to this article. An article about a particular barcode (or other general technology) should not recount every use of that barcode/technology. Glrx (talk) 16:46, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that File:QR Code Structure Example 2.svg will be appearing as picture of the day on December 18, 2012. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2012-12-18. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. :) Thanks! —howcheng {chat} 17:43, 17 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Picture of the day

The structure of a quick response (QR) code, a type of matrix barcode that can encode virtually any kind of data. Originally developed for the automotive industry to track vehicles during the manufacturing process, it has since become one of the most popular types of two-dimensional barcodes. The QR code is detected as a 2-dimensional digital image by an image sensor and is then digitally analyzed. The processor locates the three distinctive squares at the corners of the image, and uses a smaller square near the fourth corner to normalize the image for size, orientation, and angle of viewing. The small dots are then converted to binary numbers and validity checked with an error-correcting code.Image: Richard Wheeler

Archive – More featured pictures...

Hello,
I added the QR Code on the right, with the picture inside. I think it is very interessting for people, that these ISO Codes can also be creative, with the pixelsolution. I will add it back, because given explaination of remove [4] gives [5] no comments in this direction. The added code is not an art, just an interessting possibility to use black and white code for picture content and link. What do you mean? Conny (talk) 09:57, 28 January 2013 (UTC).[reply]

• Oppose reintroduction. The pix should only be reinserted if there is a consensus to reinsert it. That something can be done does not mean that WP should report it. The QR code is also an EL. The article might include some artistic QR images beyond its current WP example, but I would not include this one. Glrx (talk) 16:45, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  If there are no senseful arguments, I think inserting should be no problem. What is an EL? Please justify, why not to include this one. BTW: Seems that you are simply against such QR, your reasons change arround the clock and have no real base... Greetings, Conny (talk) 16:50, 30 January 2013 (UTC).[reply]

  WP:ELNO is a senseful argument, and I completely agree that this QR code does not belong on this article. You may certainly place it on your own user page, but not in any Wikipedia article. Aside from that, there is also the fact that the image is quite clearly self-promotional in nature, and does not illustrate anything that is not already present in the article, or could not be demonstrated without promoting any individual person or thing. - SudoGhost 17:27, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  Hey Sudo,
  it is not my aim to place this QR on my userpage or promote myself. It is my aim to show people, that there could be QR codes with pictures inside. For sure it is demonstrating something not placed in the article yet (or did I read not good enough?). Do you have a better idea for pixelcontent? Thank you for the advice of WP:ELNO - that is correct in look of point 10 f. e. These are arguments, not like "I would not include this one" ;) . Greetings, Conny (talk) 19:33, 30 January 2013 (UTC).[reply]

  I think the objection is that WP:LINKSTOAVOID also covers external links presented as QR codes, and this QR code points to a social networking site. If you generated a similar version of this QR code that simply linked to en.wikipedia.org instead of the creator's Google Plus profile, that would be fine. --McGeddon (talk) 16:39, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, i have noticed the section about Custom QR Codes was removed from the page. Can someone say why?. Assuming 40% of marketers and businesses use either Visual QR Codes (such as at http://www.visualead.com/) or hand made Custom QR Codes (such as http://qrlicious.com/) i think there should definatly be some talk about it under the Variant section. I think its a much more relevant and interesting info than Micro QR codes — Preceding unsigned comment added by Uriel Peled (talk • contribs) 14:59, 2 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed it again. The reason it was removed was because it was an unsourced section (not counting a single primary source to a business's website), and the "examples" were all promotional links to various websites. They wouldn't be appropriate as external links, so they aren't appropriate as QR codes either. - SudoGhost 19:24, 13 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I restored the MicroQR as it is part of the current standard. I'm sympathetic to SudoGhost's view because this article has become a magnet for several purveyors doing what seems to be push marketing. If such symbols are prominent, I could see using one symbol as an example with an explanation that they rely on / compromise the code's ECC abilities. Glrx (talk) 05:56, 16 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

These two examples don't work that way. They put the modifications in unused space within the code and do not have deliberate errors that need correcting. For that to work, the authors had to force a particular mask pattern rather than letting the encoder pick the "best" one, so they are technically noncompliant encodings. Bobmath (talk) 13:20, 10 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

See http://www.thonky.com/qr-code-tutorial/character-capacities/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.35.184.111 (talk) 04:38, 2 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

In http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:QR_Character_Placement.svg there is mentioned, that dark would be 0 on even rows and 1 on odd rows. Where does this information come from? I read a lot in ISO/IEC 18004:2006(E), but I could not figure out anything about a different encoding on even or odd rows? I think this should get a reference or be deleted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 176.198.137.139 (talk) 19:15, 12 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The encoding algorithm has a masking step; one of several XOR masks are chosen to minimize unwanted patterns in the data pixels. From the .svg description, the selected mask is one that inverts the even rows. Glrx (talk) 19:42, 12 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"Invention" section is incomplete. Example of "History" content, that can be compressed: http://www.qrcode.com/en/history/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 179.208.229.37 (talk) 14:10, 14 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I hope my entry tonight regarding risk was more appropriate to Wikipedia than before. If you can improve it, please do so. Risks associated w/ QR Codes are far more than just dangerous URLs (which are well known and have their own many different Wiki pages, such as Webpage_hijacking and Cross-site_scripting). They can be as dangerous as the many forms of Computer_virus. But QR Code risks are unique in their own right and possibly greater than these given their easy creation and distribution, their complexity/obscurity to humans, the readiness of smartphone users to scan it, and the immense number of good (and bad) things that little bit of code can do to a computer. For actual results read https://appsec-labs.com/blog/tag/qrcode/ Supposedly, Blackhat 2011 had a Skytalk, an unannounced and anonymous Black_Hat_Briefings, where a research group posted a QR Code on the back of bathroom stall doors which when scanned opened an innocent webpage but also turned on the camera and streamed its video to a webserver until the battery died or memory was corrupted. There might also be QR Code risks that could break a Reader just like malicious webpages can break out of a browser.... but until those details appear in a more public forum they'll remain mere speculation and thus hide out here on the discussion page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sweerek (talk • contribs) 02:33, 1 September 2011‎ (UTC)[reply]

I've added a very brief introduction, since that section is a bit misleading in making it appear as if the QR codes themselves would do the harm, when they really can only send data to the applications associated with the particular data type, like the browser, which may then allow exploiting a flaw in that application. In short: I want to make it clear that these issues are due to faulty implementations, not by design. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hansschmucker (talk • contribs) 10:29, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not enough of an expert to know what's wrong, but the last two QR codes in the samples are not properly described - they are both "Version 40 (177×177)" when the one on the right is obviously more data than the one on the left - for example, one is 5 "alignment blocks" wide while the other is 7 "alignment blocks". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pxtl (talk • contribs) 17:40, 8 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, first does not look like a V.40, but I don't have the spec available right now. Glrx (talk) 23:02, 9 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Is a software needed? Which device can run that software? The article don't tell very much about this. --109.53.213.118 (talk) 08:39, 23 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not entirely sure what you're asking. Yes, software is used in both creating and reading QR codes, which is run on a large variety of devices. This seems clear enough to me, from the article. /ninly_(talk) 14:08, 15 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I came here for a simple description of how I can read QR code with my smartphone. No easy way to find it from here. Maybe it's embedded somewhere in the article filled with lots of technical details but of course, I don't have time for that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.154.0.250 (talk • contribs) 17:36, 27 October 2014

"A printing company recommends a minimum size for a printed QR code module of 0.03 inches (0.76 mm)"

It's either 0.3 inches = 0.76mm or 0.03 inches = 0,076mm

Tried to edit it but it is a formula.

Given that the source is a commercial site selling a service and I couldn't find any independent source to back that up, I've removed the section entirely for now. - Aoidh (talk) 10:46, 15 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please replace footnote number eight with the following updated link: https://github.com/zxing/zxing/wiki/Barcode-Contents

The zxing project has moved to GitHub along with its associated Wiki. Jardom90 (talk) 23:36, 29 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: Current reference is still valid. -- Orduin ^Discuss 20:58, 30 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The ISO QR-code specification appears to have been updated, to ISO/IEC 18004:2015 (http://www.iso.org/iso/home/store/catalogue_ics/catalogue_detail_ics.htm?csnumber=62021), as of 1st Feb 2015. Perhaps someone with access to the spec document could update the article? 109.147.59.127 (talk) 20:21, 10 June 2015 (UTC)ChrisHowlett[reply]

the "Version 25" sample's content matches the descriptions for the version 40 qr code. The rest are accurate, though the v.40 code is not being properly recognized by my decoder, which is recognizing it as a "product" with a variable string of numbers following it. I assume the errors are caused by limitations in my phone's cameras and reading off a monitor screen. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:445:2:9F00:9037:D7C1:8A32:7CF1 (talk) 00:32, 31 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on QR code. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20150724205900/http://www.doiserbia.nb.rs/img/doi/1820-0214/2014/1820-02141400054Q.pdf to http://www.doiserbia.nb.rs/img/doi/1820-0214/2014/1820-02141400054Q.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:21, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• https://racoindustries.com/barcodegenerator/2d/qr-code/ Raco Industries QR code generator: User-programmable text, code version, error correction level, encoding type, module size, quiet zone, margins; in any of several graphic file formats. Larry Koenigsberg (talk) 02:40, 27 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

An ip's edit edit to the article was unhelpful because it removed the photograph at the top of the page and replaced it with a red link. If the title needs capitalising then the article needs to be moved to the new title, please discuss here. Theroadislong (talk) 15:31, 14 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

too few people know, that they need special decoding apps — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:65:e902:38da:2478:dca4:1eb1:c349 (talk • contribs) 22:59, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

nobody does explain, what this strange pixel pattern are about. The word qr code on top could help. In some countries they do not spread. Why ? Do people really understand, what qr codes are ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:65:e902:38da:2478:dca4:1eb1:c349 (talk • contribs) 22:59, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

2402:8100:3957:385D:0:0:0:1 (talk) 12:21, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. NiciVampireHeart 13:26, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Qryptal (talk) 09:08, 15 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate.  Spintendo  13:13, 15 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

223.182.220.45 (talk) 02:02, 18 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Kyle Bryant (talk) 02:09, 18 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

What is the protocol for changing broken links? Snehratna (talk) 06:26, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If you have a replacement link, just change the reference. Be bold. Jordan Brown (talk) 15:55, 23 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The official guideline is WP:DEADREF, which begins by saying "Do not delete a citation merely because the URL is not working." and then gives some practical advice (next search the site to see if the content has moved to a different URL on the same site; if that doesn't work, next see if the content has been archived at a web archive service; and so on). --DavidCary (talk) 03:15, 24 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The page right now has a ton of redundant information, overlap and missing links. I would assume that if I am here to learn about QR Codes, I should also be introduced to all the possible use-cases, the current issues that are being solved using QR Codes (like climate change and authentication) and where I might be able to create a QR Code for myself. What's the protocol for this?

Snehratna (talk) 06:17, 24 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

QR code#Risks is misleading - as this article explains, it's the URL the 2D barcodes decode to that's malicious, giving a link to a virus in an app store. So the 2D barcode doesnt contain an executable that the reader is to execute according to the decoding protocol, & the same vulnerability applies to all 2D barcodes and data sharing media. 131.191.99.210 (talk) 13:41, 11 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The claim is that the URL itself can include JavaScript that can attack the browser directly. Even if it's a simple non-executable URL, it can point to a web page that attacks your browser. In theory JavaScript and web pages are safe, but in practice browsers have bugs that can be exploited. It isn't necessary that you download an app. Jordan Brown (talk) 16:09, 23 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Jordan Brown, you may be right, but Wikipedia policy (WP:VERIFY) is "verifiability, not truth". The above reference says "QR codes cannot be viruses. At the worst case they can point to a URL that .. if you choose to download it ... may ... download a malware." Do you have any reference that says that the URL can contain malicious JavaScript? (The "EvilQR" reference *speculates* that such a malicious URL may be possible, and I agree that practically any URL can be encoded into a QR code, but their testing seems to indicate that most of the tested QR decoders (19 out of 21) didn't execute any JavaScript embedded embedded into the URL before asking for confirmation. The "alert" of the remaining 2 QR decoders is alarming, but it's not clear that indicates a real problem. --DavidCary (talk) 03:15, 24 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You could have a QR code that attacks the decoder, a QR code that encodes a URL (JavaScript or not) that attacks the browser, or a QR code that encodes a URL that points to a malicious web page. All are certainly plausible, and all have the same end result: your device is attacked. I wouldn’t consider the difference to be important to a non-technical audience. It would be a serious disservice to say that QR codes are safe, without mentioning the risks associated with the remainder of the pipeline. All that said, I’m not unhappy with the current text. It could be finessed a bit to be more technically accurate while still conveying the key warning: that there is a risk. Jordan Brown (talk) 18:44, 28 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The last sentence of the section is also misleading. I have not found The Wire page linked in the references, but after searching for Russian language sources for this, I found https://xakep.ru/2011/10/03/57128/ (in Russian) and https://securelist.com/malicious-qr-codes-pushing-android-malware/31386/ (in English). Both of these pages describe an Android trojan that was spread via QR codes and sent the $6 texts. I think that while using the codes to spread malware is definitely a risk, it was not the code itself that caused the phones that scanned it to send the messages (this would be the case if they used a vulnerability in the reader app to do this). X0wl (talk) 15:39, 13 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I thought the little square on the corner was one of the essential parts that must be present for a code to be readable... --95.92.219.13 (talk) 07:42, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I just now used the ZXing project's Android app to read that QR code with the lower-right corner torn off, and it decoded correctly (to a link to http://en.m.wikipedia.org ).

So apparently that little square alignment mark is *not* essential. --DavidCary (talk) 03:15, 24 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

01703830469 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.107.123.220 (talk) 06:34, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

i dont know why at the top of the page it says 29191. maybe it should be there maybe it shouldnt. idk so im keeping it there and posting this Bumpf (talk) 18:29, 25 February 2021 (UTC)bUMPF[reply]

For the second image under #Encoding (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:QR_Character_Placement.svg), I'm pretty sure the words even and odd have been switched. I tried decoding it to binary by hand, and it doesn't make any sense if I use what they have, but if I change it so "dark is 0 on odd rows, 1 on even rows" I get the expected output. However, I'm not entirely sure if my suspicions are correct, and I don't have the permissions to change the image, so I've added it to the talk page. Edit: Actually, it's possible the text in the image is correct if it's assumed that the rows start at 0 from the bottom. It would most likely be helpful to label rows on the image. SapphireDroplets (talk) 02:19, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

During the month of June 2011, 14 million American mobile users scanned a QR code or a barcode.

A QR code is not a bar code and a bar code is not a QR code! For all we know they could have scanned 13,999,999 bar codes and only one QR code! This statistic seems almost completely meaningless and why the arbitrary date of June 2011? John Alan Elson★ WF6I A.P.O.I. 14:49, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

There IS a problème with thé formule (i/2+j/3)%2 in the chapter design the mask 001 in thé image To calculate the Mask , i tried but i don't arrive to found the good formule. Someone Can help me ? Chrome-ozome (talk) 19:04, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry m'y Bad it's work Chrome-ozome (talk) 21:03, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Can we make this the new infobox image? Please? Pretty please? Even temporarily, like on April 1? --Diriector_Doc├─────┤^Talk_Contribs 22:23, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I tried to do this but it was reverted, don't you think at least one article on Wikipedia out of the five million should have humor? Lallint⟫⟫⟫Talk 17:09, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

In the last sentence under "Adoption", change: "QR code use since the begin of COVID-19 related shelter-in-place orders" to "QR code use since the beginning of COVID-19 related shelter-in-place orders" Reticulum271 (talk) 20:53, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Cannolis (talk) 21:15, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Section: Uses Subsection: Virtual stores Citation [35] for "Walmart, Procter & Gamble and Woolworths have already adopted the Virtual Store concept." neither refers to Walmart nor Proctor & Gamble. Remove Walmart and Proctor & Gamble from this sentence. Also, wonder if this is relevant: shop2mobi.com is for sale. Reference [35] https://web.archive.org/web/20160606021802/http://www.shop2mobi.com/blog/virtual-qr-code-store-examples — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.166.42.0 (talk) 09:11, 19 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Section: Uses Subsection: Virtual stores Citation [35] for "Walmart, Procter & Gamble and Woolworths have already adopted the Virtual Store concept." neither refers to Walmart nor Proctor & Gamble. Remove Walmart and Proctor & Gamble from this sentence. Also, wonder if this is relevant: shop2mobi.com is for sale. Reference [35] https://web.archive.org/web/20160606021802/http://www.shop2mobi.com/blog/virtual-qr-code-store-examples — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.166.42.0 (talk) 09:15, 19 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 19 September 2022 and 9 December 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Rpatel55, Kc3742 (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Rpatel55 (talk) 23:28, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]