[Tom Di 22. September 2009]: [...] agree on all that. [...] > Btw, you just gave me an idea (about a bug actually) we should normalize the > "naked" number we got from a phone call with the prefix info from the > current network and prefix the contact by using the prefixes from the sim > card settings. That is the correct thing to do, atm we only normalize using > "sim card settings" (actually the settings we set in a file, which in turn > should be the same). > > Doc, what do you think about the last proposal, any reason why we shouldn't > do that? > -- > Tom.
My original suggestion was to have 3 sets of [IP,CC,NP,AC] tuples, one for (== associated to) the stored contacts, one for inbound phonecall numbers, and maybe one for inbound SMS numbers (as those sometimes are mangled differently than the calls). Usually inbound numbers *always* should be normalized / fully qualified. But there's a lot of braindamaged provider network equipment out there - see Maroc. The contacts settings might be fetched from SIM stored info *once* to fill a NULL value in phoneutils.cfg. If there's a setting in config, then don't touch it. Another nice idea is to store a dummy contact to contacts, like >name: X-MySettingsForPhoneutils_contacts >number: 00;49;0;911 The inbound call and inbound SMS settings might be fetched from network info via some call to modem after registering, as they are network specific (usually, you never know what maroc carrier does to numbers for roaming SIMs). If you can't get decent info from network, you might want to fallback to a phoneutils.cfg provisioned default. Maybe also have a flag in there to *override* network info by a setting there in config. cheers jOERG
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ Shr-User mailing list [email protected] http://lists.shr-project.org/mailman/listinfo/shr-user
