In message <[email protected]>, Nero Imhard writes: >On 2012-01-09, at 20:42, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > >> It can easily be argued that if you need UT to better than 1s, you >> should use one of IERS's UT products and you will have five years to >> make the fix. > >This is the arrogance I mentioned earlier. What good is a definition >(that of UTC being a good approximation of UT) if you can't rely >on it?
Uhm, we seem to have lost context: If the definition is changed, you get 5 years to switch to a timescale with a usable definition before the change takes effect. -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 [email protected] | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence. _______________________________________________ LEAPSECS mailing list [email protected] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs
