Update PhoneNumberMetadata

[szymon-jez]

Refs #42, #39, #33

Problem

The library uses outdated metadata. Therefore it is not validating/formatting some numbers right.

Solution

To upgrade the metadata it is also necessary to upgrade the code.

[josemrb]

Tasks

Add method getLengthOfGeographicalAreaCode

Implement function

• getLengthOfGeographicalAreaCode

and corresponding test

• testGetLengthOfGeographicalAreaCode

Add method getLengthOfNationalDestinationCode

Implement function

• getLengthOfNationalDestinationCode

and corresponding test

• testGetLengthOfNationalDestinationCode

Add method getCountryMobileToken

Implement function

• getCountryMobileToken

and corresponding test

• testGetCountryMobileToken

Add method isPossibleNumberForType

Implement function

• isPossibleNumberForType

and corresponding tests

• testIsPossibleNumberForType_DifferentTypeLengths
• testIsPossibleNumberForType_LocalOnly
• testIsPossibleNumberForType_DataMissingForSizeReasons
• testIsPossibleNumberForType_NumberTypeNotSupportedForRegion

Add method isPossibleNumberForTypeWithReason

Implement function

• isPossibleNumberForTypeWithReason

and corresponding tests

• testIsPossibleNumberForTypeWithReason_DifferentTypeLengths
• testIsPossibleNumberForTypeWithReason_LocalOnly
• testIsPossibleNumberForTypeWithReason_DataMissingForSizeReasons
• testIsPossibleNumberForTypeWithReason_NumberTypeNotSupportedForRegion
• testIsPossibleNumberForTypeWithReason_FixedLineOrMobile

Add method truncateTooLongNumber

Implement function

• truncateTooLongNumber

and corresponding test

• testTruncateTooLongNumber

Add method canBeInternationallyDialled

Implement function

• canBeInternationallyDialled

and corresponding test

• testCanBeInternationallyDialled

Add method isAlphaNumber

Implement function

• isAlphaNumber

and corresponding test

• testIsAlphaNumber

Review method testNumberLengthForType_

Review helper function

• testNumberLengthForType_

Review method parse

Review function

• parse

and add new tests

• testParseNumbersWithPlusWithNoRegion
• testParseExtensions
• testParseHandlesLongExtensionsWithExplicitLabels
• testParseHandlesLongExtensionsWithAutoDiallingLabels
• testParseHandlesShortExtensionsWithAmbiguousChar
• testParseHandlesShortExtensionsWhenNotSureOfLabel

Current Test Suite

• Fix currently failing tests (250 tests, 12 failures)

[icecapp]

I've been running some tests and noticed an area code that was recently introduced in Alberta, Canada, that would fail the is_valid_number?/1 test.

iex(33)> {:ok, parsed} = ExPhoneNumber.parse("368.551.0368", "CA") 
{:ok,
 %ExPhoneNumber.Model.PhoneNumber{
   country_code: 1,
   country_code_source: nil,
   extension: nil,
   italian_leading_zero: nil,
   national_number: 3685510368,
   number_of_leading_zeros: nil,
   preferred_domestic_carrier_code: nil,
   raw_input: nil
 }}

(fails with "US" as well)

This js port validates the previous number properly (see sandbox)

OP stated:

To upgrade the metadata it is also necessary to upgrade the code.

My question: why are all methods listed above needed in order to get the metadata up-to-date? And would that mean that is_valid_number?/1 is broken until all this is implemented?

[josemrb]

My question: why are all methods listed above needed in order to get the metadata up-to-date?

Because they are needed to handle the newer metadata.

And would that mean that is_valid_number?/1 is broken until all this is implemented?

Yes, although it isn't broken, just outdated.

You could build the current develop branch as it contains the latest metadata (8.12.27) but it will fail if it comes across a new case that has not been implemented (239 tests, 8 failures)

iex(1)> {:ok, parsed} = ExPhoneNumber.parse("368.551.0368", "CA")
{:ok,
  %ExPhoneNumber.Model.PhoneNumber{
              country_code: 1,
              country_code_source: nil,
              extension: nil,
              italian_leading_zero: nil,
              national_number: 3685510368,
              number_of_leading_zeros: nil,
              preferred_domestic_carrier_code: nil,
              raw_input: nil
  }}
iex(2)> ExPhoneNumber.is_valid_number?(parsed)
true

As the metadata changes every 2-3 weeks, it is very likely that you will find a phone number that does not pass the validation even if it is "real". See Falsehoods About Phone Numbers.

[icecapp]

Thanks for the quick reply.

Just wondering, in general, what is the delay for mirroring official libphonenumber, as the client implementation I'm using of libphonenumber accepts certain numbers that ex_phone_number doesn't.

Nevertheless respect, kudos and many thanks for developing, open-sourcing and maintaining this library. 🤜

[szymon-jez]

Just wondering, in general, what is the delay for mirroring official libphonenumber

https://github.com/socialpaymentsbv/ex_phone_number/blob/master/README.md states the currently used metadata version. This should give you enough information to see the delay.

[josemrb]

Nothing in particular, I haven't had enough time, pending changes have accumulated and the code is complex in some parts, although the latter is the result of following the upstream project since this is almost a function by function port.

[jasminpatel28]

When are you planning to release new version?
I have built from develop branch and looks problem solved for me but its not working fine with v0.2.1
Earlier Its not able to validate Columbian (CO) number with area code (324)

[szymon-jez]

When are you planning to release new version?

There is no release date set. As you can see the work was started many months ago and might be considered slow, but it is steady moving forward thanks to @josemrb and recently also @tomciopp. I think that – because of to the clear plan laid out above by Jose – others might also join this effort.

I have built from develop branch and looks problem solved for me but its not working fine with v0.2.1 Earlier Its not able to validate Columbian (CO) number with area code (324)

I think that develop should not break anything but rather improve things, so if you need any feature from it that is not working in the latest release then I would go for it.

[jasminpatel28]

When are you planning to release new version?

There is no release date set. As you can see the work was started many months ago and might be considered slow, but it is steady moving forward thanks to @josemrb and recently also @tomciopp. I think that – because of to the clear plan laid out above by Jose – others might also join this effort.

I have built from develop branch and looks problem solved for me but its not working fine with v0.2.1 Earlier Its not able to validate Columbian (CO) number with area code (324)

I think that develop should not break anything but rather improve things, so if you need any feature from it that is not working in the latest release then I would go for it.

Thanks @szymon-jez for your reply.
I need lib to support changes happened to Columbian number structure and that's available in develop branch. I saw metadata file is updated.

[lohayon]

I join here the conversation:
The library uses outdated metadata. Therefore it is not validating/formatting some numbers right.
We also encountered this issue. We potentially want to add some prefixes before the official document is released with these prefixes.
I wonder if it would be possible to make the document path dynamic and configurable.

Thanks