Talk:E.123

Proposal for a new paragraph

Please find below a proposal for a new paragraph – In case of emergency. If there are no comments within the next days the paragraph is considered supported and we will publish a revised article. ITU-T 10:51, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Makes sense to me. I checked the sources and copied the proposed section into the article. --plauz (talk) 12:01, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

In case of emergency

A standardized language-independent way to identify a next-of-kin (or other emergency contact) in a mobile handset’s directory, in case of an emergency, has in May 2008 been adopted as a new clause in Recommendation E.123.

It proposes to store emergency contact numbers in the form “0nx”, where “n” is a digit from 1 through 9 and “x” is any meaningful descriptive character string in any language or script (e.g. “Anna” or “Spouse”).

In the handset's directory this would be displayed as "01Anna" or "01Spouse" enabling easy identification by the emergency services. The handset’s directory entry (in the “contact number” field) would contain the actual number of the person to call in case of emergency.

This scheme is a language-independent version of the ICE scheme that became popular in certain parts of the world from 2005 onwards.

Parentheses

Parentheses are recommended around the area-code in the national notation (because frequently the area code can be omitted when dialling from within the same area-code; the parenthesis informs the reader which part they can omit). The area code should not be parenthesised in the international notation. Er - why on earth? Are we supposed to present all telephone numbers in both forms, so that international callers can know the international code, and so that local callers know which part is the area code? Doh. 87.194.213.229 (talk) 08:52, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

Present the number in international format using all the digits that will be dialled from abroad. This includes the country code, area code (if it has one) and subscriber number. Indicate the callers access code with a 'plus' sign. The caller will dial 00 or 011 or similar in place of the plus sign. Alternatively, present the number in national format using all the digits that will be dialled when calling within the country. If the area code is optional for local calls, place it in parentheses. Don't present the number using a jumbled up mixture of digits that will or will not be dialled depending on whether you are calling from inside or outside the country. The trend for incorrectly adding a bracketed (0) trunk code to international numbers has directly led to this crazy situation. See also this RevK Rant and this article. - 79.70.225.11 (talk) 13:27, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

Problem is that sloppy software such as MicroSoft Outllook cannot handle standard-conforming data. For example, opening a vcf file with "TEL;WORK;VOICE:+49 228 1234 56" will make Outlook think this is a German nummber but without area code. Only something like "TEL;WORK;VOICE:+49 (228) 1234 56" will make Outlook recognize 228 as area code (though the extension is still not recognized).--Hagman (talk) 13:40, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

History

From [1] it looks like the current version was published in 2001 with the emergency contact info addendum in 2008, and there was a previous version in 1988? A history of the standard would be a good topic for expansion. -- Beland (talk) 21:51, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

Merge Proposal

I propose that Microsoft telephone number format be merged into E.123. The content is basically the same except for the parenthesis thing, which is already discussed in this article. 70.166.125.77 (talk) 00:03, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

• Rewritten and merged. --Dmitry _{(talk•contibs)} 18:50, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on E.123. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20090203024121/http://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/cn_news_newmarket/displayarticle.asp?id=198611 to http://new.cambridge-news.co.uk/cn_news_newmarket/displayarticle.asp?id=198611

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 15:43, 31 March 2016 (UTC)