Which zeros to drop...

Edmund wrote on 5 Jun 2005 07:30:45 -0700:


EL Hatunen wrote:
?? (My question to you: Can you confirm that it *is* in
fact
?? 011 (44) to make international calls from America (to
?? Britain), not 00 (44) as from most places? It'd be useful
?? me knowing that if I ever go to America).
??
?? We always use 011 to access international service; it even
?? says so in the front of the telephone book; did you think
?? to look there?

EL Just looked in my (UK) phone book now....

EL has all the country codes with 00 prefixed, doesn't say
EL anything about dialing Britain from abroad.

By the way, since this thread is beginning to diverge more than
I thought even if the method is now well established, I was
*not* the person who suggested looking in a UK phone book for
the connection code in the US :-) If you are interested in
finding these things out, Google will probably work although the
world seems to be full of people who don't think examples are
necessary!


James Silverton.

James Silverton wrote:
Edmund wrote on 5 Jun 2005 07:30:45 -0700:


EL Hatunen wrote:
?? (My question to you: Can you confirm that it *is* in
fact
?? 011 (44) to make international calls from America (to
?? Britain), not 00 (44) as from most places? It'd be useful
?? me knowing that if I ever go to America).
??
?? We always use 011 to access international service; it even
?? says so in the front of the telephone book; did you think
?? to look there?

EL Just looked in my (UK) phone book now....

EL has all the country codes with 00 prefixed, doesn't say
EL anything about dialing Britain from abroad.

By the way, since this thread is beginning to diverge more than
I thought even if the method is now well established, I was
*not* the person who suggested looking in a UK phone book for
the connection code in the US :-)

I know you weren't :-) Talking of Google, perhaps it's their threading
mechanism that made it look like I was replying to you. Maybe I should
copy the poster who puts "Following up to..." at the top of their
messages.

If you are interested in
finding these things out, Google will probably work although the
world seems to be full of people who don't think examples are
necessary!

Edmund

Mark Hewitt wrote:

"Edmund Lewis" wrote in message
oups.com...

Experimenting further with that site, it seems much of N America does
the 011 thing, even Bermuda and the British Virgin Islands which
surprises me. Most places I've tried in Africa, Asia and S America do
0044, as does New Zealand (that's the faraway place I've been that does
it, which led me to think the US might).
Australia- 001144 (eh?) Canada- also 01144 so it isn't a Commonwealth
thing either.


It's more a European thing.

No, it isn't. Most countries in the world use 00 as the international
prefix. The US and countries in the North American Numbering Plan use
011, and some other countries (Australia was mentioned) use others. The
majority use 00.

The UK international code used to be 010

Hasn't been for a good while though.

--
David Horne- www.davidhorne.net
usenet (at) davidhorne (dot) co (dot) uk

If that would be the principle, TV worldwide would still be using the
405-line black and white system the BBC adopted for the first regular
scheduled broadcasts in 1936. Or even Baird's original mechanical
system.

PJW

On Sun, 05 Jun 2005 15:07:01 +0200, Tom Peel On Sat, 04 Jun 2005
12:05:19 -0400, wrote:



Yeah. Why should a different country do something differently?
Shame. Now explain why Europe uses PAL and SECAM while we use NTSC
which was first? Shouldn't the first rule?

wrote:
Yeah. Why should a different country do something differently?
Shame. Now explain why Europe uses PAL and SECAM while we use NTSC
which was first? Shouldn't the first rule?

Yeah, but it was too complicated trying to add teletext to Mr Baird's
system.

Owain

"chancellor of the duchy of besses o' th' barn and prestwich tesco"
wrote in message
news:1gxp1k2.1gdaswvmec072N%this_address_is_for_sp ...
Mark Hewitt wrote:

"Edmund Lewis" wrote in message
oups.com...

Experimenting further with that site, it seems much of N America does
the 011 thing, even Bermuda and the British Virgin Islands which
surprises me. Most places I've tried in Africa, Asia and S America do
0044, as does New Zealand (that's the faraway place I've been that does
it, which led me to think the US might).
Australia- 001144 (eh?) Canada- also 01144 so it isn't a Commonwealth
thing either.


It's more a European thing.

No, it isn't. Most countries in the world use 00 as the international
prefix. The US and countries in the North American Numbering Plan use
011, and some other countries (Australia was mentioned) use others. The
majority use 00.

The UK international code used to be 010

Hasn't been for a good while though.


My telephone number used to be 73 before those newfangled modern exchanges
with Strowger mechanical switches got installed.

JohnT

"James Silverton" wrote in message
...
Edmund wrote on 4 Jun 2005 09:41:34 -0700:


I find I really badly need some examples. Am I right in saying that,
dialing from the US, I would reach a number
in Glasgow given as 0141 123 4567, by dialing 011 44 141 123 4567 and for
a number
in London, given as 020 7123 4567, I would dial 011 44 20 7123 4567 ?

Yes. Bang on!

Alan Harrison

"Edmund Lewis" wrote in message
oups.com...


Joan McGalliard wrote:
While we are being pedantic ....

there is one code for London, (0)20. The 7 or 8 is part of the number.
If you are in London, you can skip the 020 part. It historically
reflects the old 0171 and 0181, but that's just convenience. Eventually
London numbers will have other leading digits.

To be fair, practically no one seems to know this.

I didn't. Thanks. As you say, I thought they just replaced 0171/0181.

The importance of the correct grouping 020 7123 4567 or 020 8123 4567 is
that in dialling within London you must now include the 7 or 8 if omitting
the area code.

Alan Harrison

wrote:
On Sun, 05 Jun 2005 02:21:30 GMT, "Lennart Petersen"
wrote:


"Derek McBryde" skrev i meddelandet
...
On Sat, 04 Jun 2005 12:05:19 -0400, wrote:

On 4 Jun 2005 08:58:50 -0700, "Edmund Lewis"
wrote:


Yeah. Why should a different country do something differently?
Shame. Now explain why Europe uses PAL and SECAM while we use NTSC
which was first? Shouldn't the first rule?

Only if it remains the best. The challenge with being the first is
that others come along and improve on your ideas.

Of course. You're entirely right. I was just being facetious in
response to the poster's question as to why some country should do
something different from another.

I suggest you find the dictionary instead of phone book and look up
"joke"

:-)


Edmund

chancellor of the duchy of besses o' th' barn and prestwich tesco
wrote:
Mark Hewitt wrote:

It's more a European thing.

No, it isn't. Most countries in the world use 00 as the international
prefix. The US and countries in the North American Numbering Plan use
011, and some other countries (Australia was mentioned) use others. The
majority use 00.

The UK international code used to be 010

Hasn't been for a good while though.

You are both right. The UK changed to 00 to give uniformity
within the Common Market IIRC