Yes, thanks Bonnie. I have considered this also and they are somewhat "logically" named at this point according to functionality. I also considered adding a group "prefix" as you mention like

Routing_Method1
Routing_Method2
Recipient_Method3
Recipient_Method4

and may still do this at some point. But what I really wanted was something more elegant and OO. :-)

Bill

>Bill,
>
>The only thing I can think of to help along these lines is a naming convention for your methods ... naming them such that they are grouped logically, then they will at least be grouped together via Intellisense. For example:
>
>PersonnelMyMethodOne
>PersonnelMyMethodTwo
>
>CustomerOneMethod
>CustomerTwoMethod
>
>~~Bonnie
>
>
>
>
>>Hi Bonnie,
>>
>>Yeah, already applied regions, thanks. :-) Was looking for something to make it easier for someone using the class to locate a specific method by traversing a "path". I could theoretically have broken it up into multiple classes but wanted to keep all of the methods in the one class since they are all related at one level or another.
>>
>>Bill
>>
>>>Bill,
>>>
>>>Not with namespaces, but if you group your code into regions (by the use of #region MyRegion/#endregion) you can at least group things visually. Is this good enough for your purposes?
>>>
>>>~~Bonnie
>>>
>>>
>>>>In C#, if you have a class that has a large number of methods in it, is it possible to compartmentalize the methods within the class into groups similar to the way we would use namespaces to group files, classes, etc. so that a path is followed to the method?
>>>>
>>>>Thanks,
>>>>Bill