On Nov 14, 10:05 pm, Adrian wrote:
On Nov 14, 1:09 pm, Mizter T wrote:



On 14 Nov, 19:25, James Farrar wrote:

On Wed, 14 Nov 2007 19:13:02 GMT, wrote:

"contrex" wrote in message
roups.com...
On 14 Nov, 13:42, Rob wrote:
Hi

Does anyone know where I can find a comprehensive list of London
Underground ventilation shafts, used and disused? I went to a lecture
recently and they said there were 190 of them in total.

Thanks in advance

Rob Smith

If I were TFL I'd keep quiet about them. You might be a nutter or
terrorist for all we know.

Have you tried calling 0207 222 1234?

No such number.

Let me be a pedant back at you - there is such a number, the spacing
between the individual digits doesn't change the fact that if one
dialled it it would work - hence it is a valid telephone number.

Yes yes it isn't written in the 'approved' format, but thousands
(millions?) of Londoners do the same and manage just fine.

Yes, I use the 'correct' format, but I don't let the fact that others
don't wind me up! You should get over to uk.telecom - this 'mistake'
regularly has the inhabitants thereof completely frothing at the mouth
and winding each other up into a state of absolute indignation - I kid
you not!

Would that it were that simple. The implication is that one can dial
222 1234 within a notional STD code of "0207" AND expect to be
connected. I have heard that there are a handful of exchanges within
London were that does work. However the standard is now eight digit
local numbers within London. Dialing eight digits within STD code
"020" will always work.

Adrian

I'm well aware of all of this - though I'd eat my hat if there was a
public telephone exchange in London that still accepts 7-digit numbers
for local calling but I see that is being dealt with elsewhere in this
thread.

And I always just use the 8 digits to call London numbers from a
London landline. Indeed I normally give my number to other London
residents as just the 8 digits (unless perhaps they're specifically
entering into a mobile phone as I speak, though even sometimes then) -
and this can often cause confusion, so sometimes (dependent upon the
context) I might take that opportunity to briefly tell the recipient
that only 8 digits are needed for dialling within London. I also
normally write London numbers in the format (020) xxxx xxxx.

However I don't make a song or dance about it - that way lies the path
towards becoming a bore! If people use the 'wrong' format I do notice
but it isn't something that grates - life's too short to get fussed
about such inconsequential matters.

It is mildly disappointing to see the 'wrong' format used on official
documents / letterheads / signs, as I think those who work in
communications (in the PR sense rather than telco sense) should know
better, but it's hardly the end of the world.

Lastly "the kids" might well ignore any such distinction and just work
on the principle of an 11-digit number given the requirement to dial
the whole hog when using a mobile. I'd definitely point to mobile
phones as being a significant reason why the whole number is often
given - and if the whole number is given, then people care less about
breaking it down and putting the spaces in the right places.

Plus even the CLI on one of my BT brand phones connected to a BT line
displays the number incorrectly, which is a bit shabby!