E.164 phone number example is not accurately representing E.164 format

Originally submitted by Kyoho Satsumi (Kyoho Satsumi) on 2024-08-14

In section 5.1, phone_number member description:

End-User's preferred telephone number. E.164 [E.164] is RECOMMENDED as the format of this Claim, for example, +1 (425) 555-1212 or +56 (2) 687 2400. If the phone number contains an extension, it is RECOMMENDED that the extension be represented using the RFC 3966 [RFC3966] extension syntax, for example, +1 (604) 555-1234;ext=5678.

While OIDC spec recommends E.164, the example shown here (including spaces, parentheses, and hyphens) is different from widely recognized E.164 format (no space/parenthesis/hyphen) , which I think it is confusing.

Here are couple of sources I found that explain E.164 formatting:

• https://help.twilio.com/articles/223183008-Formatting-International-Phone-Numbers
• https://www.twilio.com/docs/glossary/what-e164
• https://voipstudio.com/blog/what-is-the-e-164-format-and-how-to-use-it-correctly/
• https://github.com/google/libphonenumber?tab=readme-ov-file#quick-examples

Is it possible to fix these examples in the errata?

Section 5.6.2.1. Example of Aggregated Claims and 5.6.2.2. Example of Distributed Claims also have phone number examples, which might want to be fixed together if this issue is approved.

Bitbucket status: open

Bitbucket origin: issue 2165

Start with section 5.1, especially the phone_number member description and its E.164 and RFC 3966 references. Then review the phone number examples in sections 5.6.2.1 and 5.6.2.2, using the linked references to verify the formatting. Done means the affected examples consistently represent the intended formats and the errata addresses all relevant sections.