On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 1:52 AM, Rui Miguel Silva Seabrar...@1407.org wrote:
+ should be an alias to 00 if at the beggining of a number. This usage of +
is so common and international that it would be IMHO dumb to intentionally
ignore it.
Not only that, but I intentionally store all my numbers
On Wed, Sep 02, 2009 at 08:01:48AM +0200, Christ van Willegen wrote:
On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 1:52 AM, Rui Miguel Silva Seabrar...@1407.org wrote:
+ should be an alias to 00 if at the beggining of a number. This usage of +
is so common and international that it would be IMHO dumb to
+ should be an alias to 00 if at the beggining of a number. This usage of +
is so common and international that it would be IMHO dumb to intentionally
ignore it.
Not only that, but I intentionally store all my numbers in the +
(usually +31...) format, since not every country has 00 as its
Sorry I missed the whole thread. Need to read it all in a free minute.
Sorry if I spam you with irrelevant stuff. But my post to dial plans and
number cannonification from last year might be interesting for you guys.
http://www.mail-archive.com/de...@lists.openmoko.org/msg00073.html
There was
On 9/2/09, Christ van Willegen cvwille...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm looking forward to having full number recognition, since I now
regularly have to 'mentally lookup' a number when it's calling me...
What do you mean? Current implementation is full and with correct
configuration supports every kind
On Mon, 31 Aug 2009, Robin Paulson wrote:
2009/8/31 Tom Yates madhat...@teaparty.net:
secondly, does that not mean that a call from 01223456789 (in the UK)
should match a contact listed as +441223456789, when the following
settings apply?
it works perfectly for me - i didn't put anything
2009/9/1 Tom Yates madhat...@teaparty.net:
that's great news. are you in the UK?
NZ, but it shouldn't matter
and if so, could you let me know a) your /etc/phone-utils.conf b) a couple
[local]
international_prefix = 00
national_prefix = 0
country_code = 64
area_code = 0
of contacts from
On 9/1/09, Tom Yates madhat...@teaparty.net wrote:
i have blanked it out (though i had to edit the file by hand for
that as the GUI won't take an empty value, saying it must be a number)
Oh, that's bug. Fixing it now, thanks for mentioning that ;)
--
Sebastian Krzyszkowiak
dos
On Tue, 1 Sep 2009, Robin Paulson wrote:
NZ, but it shouldn't matter
i agree, but how the local network presents a number does seem to vary
widely from network to network - and, indeed, application to application
(my incoming numbers on texts are a different format than those on calls).
On 9/1/09, Tom Yates madhat...@teaparty.net wrote:
On Tue, 1 Sep 2009, Robin Paulson wrote:
NZ, but it shouldn't matter
i agree, but how the local network presents a number does seem to vary
widely from network to network - and, indeed, application to application
(my incoming numbers on
On Tue, Sep 1, 2009 at 6:44 AM, Sebastian Krzyszkowiak
seba.d...@gmail.comwrote:
On 9/1/09, Tom Yates madhat...@teaparty.net wrote:
On Tue, 1 Sep 2009, Robin Paulson wrote:
NZ, but it shouldn't matter
i agree, but how the local network presents a number does seem to vary
widely from
On Tue, 1 Sep 2009, Sebastian Krzyszkowiak wrote:
Everything contact lockup related in SHR and opimd works for me, and I
can't see why it couldn't work with correct configuration. In case it
doesn't work for you - please send here phone number which is reported
by network, phone number in
On Tue, Sep 01, 2009 at 06:17:20PM +0100, Tom Yates wrote:
On Tue, 1 Sep 2009, Sebastian Krzyszkowiak wrote:
Everything contact lockup related in SHR and opimd works for me, and I
can't see why it couldn't work with correct configuration. In case it
doesn't work for you - please send here
On 8/31/09, Tom Yates madhat...@teaparty.net wrote:
well, i've switched to SHR, and i may i first say how much it's improved
since i last tried it - very very nice! though i am looking forward to a
testing branch emerging.
the wiki at
14 matches
Mail list logo
