On 29 January 2011 02:02, Michael Sokolov <[email protected]> wrote: >> Thus my conversion is based around the primary importance of the day, >> and its subdivisions of hour, minute and second making a fixed 86400 >> pattern. > > For the record, I agree with Stephen 100%. I choose to live my life on > a rubber timescale similar to UTC-SLS, and I am prepared to use deadly > firepower to defend my right to live my life on this timescale.
It is my opinion, coming from an open source background, that if the body currently defining leap seconds stops doing so with less than 100% consensus, then the leap second defining process would be forked. Some other person/body/open source group would take on the responsibility to define them. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fork_%28software_development%29 If this happens, I therefore think that there may end up being two versions of "UTC" in common use, which would be a far worse situation than today. Stephen _______________________________________________ LEAPSECS mailing list [email protected] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs
