> The fundamental problem is that a vast majority of the worlds
> software is written as if leap seconds simply do not exist.

This may or may not be a boundary condition.  The fundamental system 
engineering problem is that there are two different types of time, two kinds of 
clock.

No coherent systems engineering process has been used to attempt to sort out 
the possible solution space for this problem.

> The fact that they do, are horribly expensive to test, and tend not
> to get tested because *recently* they have not happened a lot, is
> merely icing on the cake.

Rare classes of event are often tested by injecting instances artificially.  
You are merely asserting all of these second-order issues in precisely the same 
way that you are asserting the first-order issues.

It is patently absurd to suggest that something is too dangerous to address in 
an appropriate engineering sense to mitigate the risks.

> Their solution for leapseconds, for which the system as a whole has
> not been tested, is that they announce to all planes in their
> air-space that they are "on their own, to remain on course until
> further notice" and then they wait for the light-show to calm down.

Asserting that some actor has done some inappropriate thing is immaterial to 
how appropriate things should be done.

> I'm sure it's known, and I think the reason is either somebody
> uninformed panicing, on somebody well-informed panicking.

Asserting that whoever it was was panicky doesn't seem like a strong argument 
for your position (whatever it was).

Again and again and again - you are simply assuming that there are no negative 
affects from redefining UTC.  The issue is not leap seconds, which are merely a 
means to an end, the issue is redefining Coordinated Universal Time to no 
longer be a kind of Universal Time.  It is certain that this will break large 
quantities of astronomical software.  Nobody has looked to see what it will 
break in other communities.

Somebody should actually look.

Consensus should be reached before voting on the issue.

Rob


_______________________________________________
LEAPSECS mailing list
[email protected]
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs

Reply via email to