Hi Jim :)
   Well, since Oregon just implemented an Overlay methodology for its new Area
code and we have started our 6 month countdown until 10 digit dialing becomes
mandatory..... I guess we have an opinion ... at least I do :) but then I always
do! hehehe

   10 digit dialing is troublesome... but not bad...and you get used to it...
(at least the "Better-Half" who moved from New York last fall was used to it...
she had to dial all 10 digits for years there...)

    I find the reassignment of an Area Code or the changing of it to be much
more of a pain as you have to go in and change all the entries in your
databases... and if you are the business in the area code that is changing...
well... new letterhead, new cards new everything!!!

So... I would vote for the 10 digit dialing as I did here :)  'cause it is less
painful and expensive... :)

Art "Remembering having to change 250,000+ numbers hehe" Bahrs

----------
>From: Jim Phillips <[log in to unmask]>
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Off Topic: Telephone Area Codes
>Date: Thu, 22 Jul, 1999, 10:34
>

> I know we have discussed this in the past, but I just received an
> opinion survey from the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio (who
> oversees the telephone services in Ohio, among other things) asking
> me my preference for the introduction of new telephone area codes.
>
> They are offering two options:  Geographical Split, and Overlay.
>
> My understanding of these two options is that Geographical Split
> is where an area code defines an exclusive geographical area.
> As telephone numbers are depleted and a new area code is assigned,
> all the phone numbers in a particular geographical area are switched
> to the new area code.  This allows local calling (within the same
> area code) to be done with only seven digits.
>
> Overlay on the other hand ignores geographical boundaries so you
> could end up with two phone lines in the same house or business
> that have different area codes.  This means that local calls
> would have to use the full 10-digit telephone number (including
> the area code).
>
> Also, I deduce that Geographical Split has been the "traditional"
> way of doing things, at least here in the USA.  Have I missed
> anything?  What do you think of these two options?
>
> In the letter the PUCO points out that FCC regulations prohibit
> the assignation of an area code exclusively for wireless telephones.
> In my humble estimation, this is a stupid regulation.  Why not
> have an area code just for wireless?
>
>
> Jim Phillips                            Manager of Information Systems
> Voice: (330) 527-2124                   Therm-O-Link, Inc.
>   Fax: (330) 527-2123                   PO Box 285; 10513 Freedom St.
> Email: [log in to unmask]       Garrettsville, Ohio  44231