Hi Nick, I gave a talk on "Changing Area Codes in the Databases" last year at the SRN National Users Group Conference. One of the points I made is not that we need more area codes but that we need more digits in the phone number. Think about it... there are only 10,000 numbers possible per prefix (or exchange) and less than 1,000 prefixes per area code...(there are reserved combinations such as 911 that can't be used, or at the very least shouldn't be used!) In a major metropolitan (sp) area such as LA, Seattle or even Portland, OR (hehehe) this is a problem.... I mean how many of us have mulitiple phone numbers ???? Pagers??? office phones? Cell Phone?? extra line or two at the house??? the Primary home phone line? It is easy to see why a city of 1 million people can need a couple of million phone lines!!! Art "What was in my coffee this morning???" Bahrs >>> Nick Demos <[log in to unmask]> 06/09/97 10:30am >>> Wirt defends ten digit dialing as necessary because of the radically increasing demand for lines, particularly for businesses. Wirt, I cannot disagree with anything you say EXCEPT your conclusion. Sure, it looks like all (or almost all) area codes will be required soon and the old method where an area code could be distinguished from an echange can no longer be used. But consider: 1. Isn't Canada a foreign country? If treated as such, it would free up about a dozen area codes. 2. The pound sign or the asterick key could be used to end a number (better than havng to dial the area code). 3. A pause of a certain length could be used to indicate the number is complete: A. 4 digits would mean it was within the exchange are. B. 7 digits - in the area code area. C. 10 digits - in the US. I believe some European cpuntries use the above method. And that's some ideas just for starters. I am sure there are others that would allow us NOT to have to dial 10 digits for every US call. Nick Demos [log in to unmask] Performance Software Group Tel. (410) 788-6777 Fax (410) 788-4476