An article from the Daily Wail ( ) on this subject

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1333264/Shortage-phone-numbers-means-you...

CJT-80 wrote on Nov 26^th, 2010 at 9:55pm:

I disagree. They obviously got the detail wrong - that is inevitable.

They did however get the essence of the story right - this is less common.

Misrepresenting the situation in London in the way that was done, does actually get the point across more clearly than explaining that shortening the "area code" and lengthening the "exchange code" made it easier to offer more numbers by opening up the possibility of "exchange codes" beginning 2,3,4,5 and 6. Under the new idea the options for 0, 1 and 9 will be added. It would indeed be more correct to refer to 020 7xxx, 020 8xxx, and 020 3xxx. The difficulty is in explaining to people that they were over-simplifying the situation in thinking that 0171 and 0181 were replaced by 0207 and 0208 respectively and that 0203 has now been added.

"National number" dialling is already becoming the norm, with in-built directories in phones, fed by CLI, and use of mobiles. Ofcom may encourage it as a standard, if abbreviated dialling options are withdrawn in certain cases. This leave those of us who press for proper presentation of London numbers becoming total pedants. Many of those I press on the subject take my point, but say that they always dial the full number anyway, as they have to on their mobile and if calling from another area. If the full number has to be dialled, punctuation is simply a matter of how it is easiest to transfer the information from the page to the dialling keys.

Mobile users will know that loading phonebooks from CLI typically stores numbers in "international", let alone "national" format. I cannot foresee the day when we will have to go that far in normal dialling.

SilentCallsVictim wrote on Nov 26^th, 2010 at 10:24pm:

The essence of the story is not that unused telephone numbers are running out because more and more are required by subscribers, but that the way in which numbers are allocated to communications providers which leads to lots of wastage.

The fact that this is now apparently being looked at, purely as a result of dwindling stocks of unallocated numbers, seems to be the way, where things are only looked at when they are seen to be an issue, rather than designing them correctly in the first place.

I suspect that our number guru catj will be able to shed much light on this.

---

National dialling only creates a lot of (or should I say, even more) wastage, whereby numbers only ever begin with 0, 1 and 999.

If national dialling only be implented with certain STD codes only, then how are we to know which it does apply to? In such circumstances, it would therefore be innappropriate to use parentheses around the code. So there will be some situations where they are appropriate to be used in geographic numbers and others where they are not. However, as we have discussed elsewhere, they often get used incorrectly, thereby diminishing their usefulness at imparting the message. Incorrect applications (such as around prefixes 0845, 0208, 02476) also suggests that authors don't understand their purpose anyway.

Quote:


Slapped wrists for that!

It's (020) 8  and (024) 76.




There's a number of related articles:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1333264/Shortage-phone-numbers-means-you...

http://www.theargus.co.uk/news/8690014.Brighton_and_Hove_could_get_new_phone_num...

http://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/news/local/localbrad/8709929.Change_to_pho...

http://www.thisisbusiness-eastmidlands.co.uk/news/need-use-01332-dialling-code-n...

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/11/25/ofcom_local_numbers/



Read this for loads of mis-reporting...

http://www.prlog.org/11109047-london-phone-numbers-are-running-out-again.html

To be very clear,
- London is NOT one of the affected areas.
- The London area codes are NOT 0203, 0207 and 0208.
- The previous London change did not add 10 million numbers. It allowed for 80 million numbers in London instead of the previous 16 million limit.

All that from a so-called "telecoms company".  What planet are THEY on?

Dave wrote on Nov 30^th, 2010 at 11:53pm:


We sometimes look to north America to see a consistent and sensible numbering scheme. It's not as good as it seems. I was in Vancouver a few years ago and we had to dial the area code even for local calls. Can't remember if we had to dial "1" before it as well. Never found out why we had to dial the area code but the only reason I can thnk of is that some numbers began with 0 or 1.

catj wrote on Dec 1^st, 2010 at 8:14am:

We have discussed numbering in US and Canada at length previously. I wouldn't describe as "complicated" whether local dialling is possible or not in particular areas. Rather, it is an illogical hotch potch.

The point of local dialling allows the use of shorter numbers for some destinations. National dialling only inhibits any short numbers being dialled.

Something which is complicated is logical. Our numbering is, broadly speaking, just that. There are a few exceptions with STD codes 01xxxx such as 015394, but in the main it's possible to work out what the local part of the number is, and thus dial it omitting the code (when calling from a line with the same code).

[quote author=catj link=1290685881/0#10 date=1291191293]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overlay_plan

Depending on where you live in the US, local calls may be 7 or 10 digits or may need 1+10 digits.

Long distance calls need 10 or 1+10 digits.

It is very complicated, as in some areas the dial plan may be permissive, and in others mandatory.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_Numbering_Plan#Dialing_plans

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_area_code_overlays
[/quote]It's not that complicated for those of us who live here :) I would also argue that, even for visitors, as long as reference is made to the local phone book, the system here is actually quite straightforward. The phone book will describe what one needs to dial, and whether the call will be free, as is common for residential subscribers. People here seem to adapt to overlays and splits very easily.

I would contrast this with the situation that I see when I visit the UK. The common use of, for example, 01142 and 0207, must be confusing for those unfamiliar with the UK system.

There are around 350 NPA ('area codes') in use in the US, Canada and twenty-odd other countries and territories. These cover landlines, cellular, toll-free and other non-geographic services. Each subscriber number is in a standardized format - NPA-NXX-XXXX. The UK has at least 600 variable length area codes for landlines alone! While the numbering scheme here has some drawbacks, and is far from perfect, I would argue that is is a significant improvement over the Ofcom-administered bodge.