Telephone Number Format Standards
Posted by Bob on March 20th, 2010
There are many different address books and directories online, and there are almost just as many different ways they store telephone numbers. I guess most people don’t realize that there are actually standards for representing phone numbers. A little bit of standardization would go a long way towards interoperability.
The standard for phone number formatting is set by the International Telecommunication Union in [E.123] and [E.164] (see the references below). The standards documents are available for a fee from the ITU [available at no charge since 2010 --Bob.] . A summary is available in the Google (UseNet) discussion group, titled Need ITU-T E.123 summary.
In short, a North American telephone number should look like:
+C-AAA-PPP-NNNN;ext=xxxx
- “+” shows where the dialing prefix goes. This is one of either the International Direct Dialing (IDD) prefix (for Canada this is “011″ for overseas dialing) or the National Direct Dialing (NDD) prefix (“1″ for calls within North America, omitted for toll-free calls),
- “C” is the Country Code (North America’s CC is “1″, and it is omitted for dialing within North America),
- “AAA” is the area code (always required for dialing in Kitchener, Toronto, and other jurisdictions),
- “PPP” is the Exchange (or Private Branch Exchange “PBX”; look in the phone book to see which exchanges are supported),
- “NNNN” is the local portion of the number,
- “;ext=” optionally identifies the next portion as an extension and “xxxx” are the digits for that extension. This syntax is usable in URIs and e-mail.
Note that the sequence “AAA-PPP-NNNN” is called a “local number” and “+C-AAA-PPP-NNNN” is called a “global number”. The “-” (hyphen) is a visual separator, as are “.” (period) , “(” (left bracket) and “)” (right bracket), which dialing applications should ignore.
I’m mostly interested in making phone number formats in e-mail addressbooks compliant with e-mail standards. The document that covers this is the IETF’s [RFC3191], "Minimal GSTN address format in Internet Mail" . The requirement is that GSTN (Global Switched Telephone Network) numbers use the global-number syntax (“+C-AAA-PPP-NNNN”).
Global-number GSTN numbers can be used for other purposes as well, such as Web page URIs. See [RFC3966], "The tel URI for Telephone Numbers". This document re-iterates that:
- 5.1.4.
- Global Numbers Globally unique numbers are identified by the leading “+” character. Global numbers MUST be composed with the country (CC) and national (NSN) numbers as specified in E.123 [E.123] and E.164 [E.164]. Globally unique numbers are unambiguous everywhere in the world and SHOULD be used.
- 5.1.5.
Local Numbers Local numbers are unique only within a certain geographical area or a certain part of the telephone network, e.g., a private branch exchange (PBX), a state or province, a particular local exchange carrier, or a particular country. URIs with local phone numbers should only appear in environments where all local entities can successfully set up the call by passing the number to the dialling software. Digits needed for accessing an outside line, for example, are not included in local numbers. Local numbers SHOULD NOT be used unless there is no way to represent the number as a global number.
Local numbers SHOULD NOT be used for several reasons. Local numbers require that the originator and recipient are configured appropriately so that they can insert and recognize the correct context descriptors. Since there is no algorithm to pick the same descriptor independently, labelling numbers with their context increases the chances of misconfiguration so that valid identifiers are rejected by mistake. The algorithm to select descriptors was chosen so that accidental collisions would be rare, but they cannot be ruled out.
If you work at a company that does work with organizations and staff members outside of the context of your area code (ie. internationally) be sure to standardize your directory on global-number syntax.
–Bob.
References:
-
[E.123] ITU-T Recommendation E.123: Telephone Network and ISDN
Operation, Numbering, Routing and Mobile Service: Notation
for National and International Telephone Numbers. 1993.
http://www.itu.int/rec/recommendation.asp?type=items&lang=e&parent=T-REC-E.123-200102-I -
A summary of [E.123] is available on Google Groups:
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/comp.std.internat/msg/24fc32228689a620?dmode=source -
[E.164] ITU-T Recommendation E.164/I.331 (05/97): The International
Public Telecommunication Numbering Plan. 1997.
http://www.itu.int/rec/recommendation.asp?type=items&lang=e&parent=T-REC-E.164-200502-I -
A summary of [E.164] is available on Wikipedia:
https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/E.164 -
[ITU]
International Telecommunications Union -
Telecommunications Standardization Sector (ITU-T)
Phillips Business Information Inc.
1201 Seven Locks Road, Suite 300
Potomac, MD 20854or call: +1-800-666-4266
-
See also: INTERNATIONAL DIALING CODES
http://countrycode.org/ -
RFC3191: Minimal GSTN address format in Internet Mail
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3191 -
RFC3192: Minimal FAX address format in Internet Mail
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3192 -
RFC3966: The tel URI for Telephone Numbers
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3966 -
RFC2846: GSTN Address Element Extensions in E-mail Services
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2846 -
RFC3601: Text String Notation for Dial Sequences and Global Switched Telephone Network (GSTN) / E.164 Addresses
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3601
Image: Telephone Dial by Leo Reynolds, used under Creative Commons v2.0 BY-NC-SA.

March 20th, 2010 at 9:50 pm
Wikipedia says http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E.123 that only spaces should be used for digit separation in E.123
March 20th, 2010 at 11:24 pm
E.123 applies to written letterhead, business cards, &c but not the encoding of URIs in HTML.
It seems that the ITU (or at least the authors of E.123) don’t understand the requirements of URI syntax. In setting a standard to make a written phone number visually appealing, E.123 created a syntax incompatible with URIs. Spaces in a phone number make for an invalid URI. E.123 also advocates writing URLs without the scheme identifier, eg. “Web: singpolyma.net” instead of “Web: https://singpolyma.net” . While browsers are remarkably tolerant of missing schemes, as a standards conformance purist I find that E.123 does not follow RFC3986 [STD66]: Uniform Resource Identifier (URI): Generic Syntax. It’s an important difference if you need to identify an FTP server from a Web server at the same address, or, as in your case, selecting a secure protocol instead of an insecure protocol.
Instead, following the telephone number syntax of RFC3601 provides both valid URI syntax and a human-readable presentation.
I’m not sure what makes the ITU authoritative over written correspondence or written URL presentation, but they try. But they’re not authoritative over URI schemes, and I’ll take my standards from the IETF instead.
One good thing to come out of this: In researching this comment, I found that the ITU has now released the text of E.123 as a free (as in gratis) PDF file, available from http://www.itu.int/rec/T-REC-E.123-200102-I/en.
–Bob.
August 14th, 2010 at 4:46 pm
This is just perfect
Thankyou for putting this out there!!!