However, it loses some of the niceties for offline check-in (the business name, in particular), without an in-app data source.
And, unfortunately, it low resolution doesn't help that much with error correction: v1 does seem to be slightly easier to scan, but only a little, and the ratios of codes scanned is pretty much the same across all versions:
ec_level L M Q H
version
1 38 46 54 65
2 32 39 49 52
3 32 41 43 50
4 32 40 46 49
5 30 39 42 49
...
39 32 41 46 50
40 31 41 47 51
total 1257 1600 1839 2001
(This is the table in the "Error correction really does make scanning more reliable" section broken down by version.)
By this table, the most-scannable encoding under the experimental conditions from the post for that data is ec level H, which requires version 3 (without considering the field-of-view required).
However, it loses some of the niceties for offline check-in (the business name, in particular), without an in-app data source.
And, unfortunately, it low resolution doesn't help that much with error correction: v1 does seem to be slightly easier to scan, but only a little, and the ratios of codes scanned is pretty much the same across all versions:
(This is the table in the "Error correction really does make scanning more reliable" section broken down by version.)By this table, the most-scannable encoding under the experimental conditions from the post for that data is ec level H, which requires version 3 (without considering the field-of-view required).