On Sat, 17 Nov 2007 19:35:09 -0000, "R. Mark Clayton"
wrote:

"James Farrar" wrote in message
.. .

Atlantic 252 used to do something worse than that way back when London
was still 01 and the international code was 010.

Their DJs always read the number as "01 0353 463 66 77".

That's only Ireland - probably cheaper than 0870 on most tariffs.

Back then mobiles were virtually non-existent... and it was still
representing an international call as a call to London.

G wrote:
On Nov 14, 1:09 pm, Mizter T wrote:
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.

And many of them get very confused when I tell them my WC1 address and
020 3xxx xxxx number, because to them it's 'not a London number'...

Well, I got a laugh today - letter on my desk from British
Telecommunications plc quoting the number as (0208) 666XXXX.
They even quoted the international version as +44 208 666XXXX

(at least they did not use the horrid, and invalid +44(0)208 version)

See http://www.me.uk/BT02080.png

If BT can't get it right, what hope have the general public.

--
Adrian Kennard, on his Mac...
Andrews & Arnold Ltd. Communications specialists. www.aaisp.net.uk
New UK Wide 03 phone numbers available now.

In message
,
JohnW writes
For the same reason that people don't prefix their numbers with +44 so
that they can be sure it will work from anywhere in the world.
Funnily enough, I've got all my close family programmed in the memory of
my mobile using the +44 prefix so that it works both here and abroad and
my children's numbers are also in with the 01144 prefix to work from the
US.
--
Clive.

In message , Graeme Wall
writes
When mobiles first came out the numbers were 10 digits, a group of four,
which identified the service company, then 6 digits to identify the
individual phone. The first group was to match in with the STD system which
used four digits to identify key exchanges. Subsequently they added in an
extra digit (7) in second place to give a number of the form 078 xxxx xxxx
however most people regarded their individual number as the six digit section
so would quote 07850 xxxxxx (in my case)
My mobile changed from 0850 to 07770.
--
Clive.

In article ,
JohnW wrote:


Pyromancer wrote:


Why do people want to only dial part of the number? Why not just dial
the whole thing and be sure it will work from anywhere in the UK,
including mobiles?

For the same reason that people don't prefix their numbers with +44 so
that they can be sure it will work from anywhere in the world.

Most of my saved mobile numbers are in +44 format, so that they worked
with foreign SMS gateways (as formerly required to access various
now-defunct SMS/Email servers).

In the early days of UK mobiles you could still just dial the subscriber
part of the number, provided that they were on your own mobile company's
primary range. E.g. 0836 was (IIRC) Vodafone, and any Vodafone mobile
user could omit the code if they were calling an 0836 code. I believe
this also worked for Cellnet on 0860 although I never had a Cellnet
mobile to try it.

When 0831 was added as a second Voda range, 0831 users could still have
codeless dialling to 0836 - but not to 0831. I might have 0831 and 0836
mixed up but the dialling certainly worked in this manner. I don't
know if this feature still survives for present day Voda subscribers
calling 07836.

Nick
--
Serendipity: http://www.leverton.org/blosxom (last update 3rd Nov 2007)

"The Internet, an ersatz counterfeit of real life"
-- Janet Street-Porter, BBC2, 19th March 1996

"Nick Leverton" wrote in message


[snip]

: : In the early days of UK mobiles you could still just
: : dial the subscriber part of the number, provided that
: : they were on your own mobile company's primary range.
: : E.g. 0836 was (IIRC) Vodafone, and any Vodafone mobile
: : user could omit the code if they were calling an 0836
: : code. I believe this also worked for Cellnet on 0860 although
: : I never had a Cellnet mobile to try it.
: :
: : When 0831 was added as a second Voda range, 0831 users
: : could still have codeless dialling to 0836 - but not to
: : 0831. I might have 0831 and 0836 mixed up but the
: : dialling certainly worked in this manner. I don't
: : know if this feature still survives for present day
: : Voda subscribers calling 07836.

No idea, but I can confirm it worked on the old 0836 range.

Ivor

In article , Paul Scott
writes
I reckon the long term plan is that 023 will become the Solent area, and the
codes inbetween (geographically speaking) will disappear when they need to
become 8 digit numbers.

As and when areas run out of numbers, the current plan is to introduce
"overlay" codes that will occupy the same area but have 8 figure
numbers.

023 will be used for the south of England. So, suppose that 01983 (Ryde)
runs out of numbers, then a new "Wight" area code will be created
consisting of 023 with 8 digit numbers beginning (say) 34. Existing Ryde
numbers will *not* be renumbered. If 01730 (Petersfield) runs out, a new
area code would be 023 with 8 digit numbers beginning (say) 61. And so
on.

024 has the same role for central England, 029 for Wales, and 037 to 039
for Scotland.

--
Clive D.W. Feather | Home:
Tel: +44 20 8495 6138 (work) | Web: http://www.davros.org
Fax: +44 870 051 9937 | Work:
Please reply to the Reply-To address, which is:

In article ,
JohnW wrote:

For the same reason that people don't prefix their numbers with +44 so
that they can be sure it will work from anywhere in the world.

I always prefix stored numbers with +44. Makes coniderable sense.

Ivor Jones wrote:
"Nick Leverton" wrote in message


[snip]

In the early days of UK mobiles you could still just
dial the subscriber part of the number, provided that
they were on your own mobile company's primary range.
E.g. 0836 was (IIRC) Vodafone, and any Vodafone mobile
user could omit the code if they were calling an 0836
code. I believe this also worked for Cellnet on 0860 although
I never had a Cellnet mobile to try it.


No idea, but I can confirm it worked on the old 0836 range.

That didn't work for me from my 0860.

Kieran

On Nov 19, 8:06 am, "Clive D. W. Feather" cl...@on-the-
train.demon.co.uk wrote:
In article , Paul Scott
writes

I reckon the long term plan is that 023 will become the Solent area, and the
codes inbetween (geographically speaking) will disappear when they need to
become 8 digit numbers.

As and when areas run out of numbers, the current plan is to introduce
"overlay" codes that will occupy the same area but have 8 figure
numbers.

023 will be used for the south of England. So, suppose that 01983 (Ryde)
runs out of numbers, then a new "Wight" area code will be created
consisting of 023 with 8 digit numbers beginning (say) 34. Existing Ryde
numbers will *not* be renumbered. If 01730 (Petersfield) runs out, a new
area code would be 023 with 8 digit numbers beginning (say) 61. And so
on.

024 has the same role for central England, 029 for Wales, and 037 to 039
for Scotland.

--
Clive D.W. Feather | Home:

Great information Clive thanks.

Question: This implies 037 and 039 will be exceptions to new non
geaographice "03" codes. Is that right?

Adrian