Dennis Ferguson wrote: > So what is the "right thing"? Am I correct in assuming > that it would be something like the following? > > - They agree that starting in 2018 time services should stop > disseminating UTC and begin disseminating TI.
Why wait? An advantage with creating TI is that it need have no connection to UTC at all. Stand up TI separately and immediately, and deprecate UTC (or don't) when convenient. Or Markus Kuhn already pointed out that they could just recommend TAI. This would be similar to the Pluto debate at the IAU - the working group suggested one solution and the assembly adopted something completely different: "You need a timescale without leap seconds? Hey! You already have a timescale without leap seconds." > - They fix up their documents to replace UTC with TI as they > get around to it. Presumably the documents already correctly describe the connection between TAI and UTC. Recall that the notion appears to be to later deep-six TAI. The precise effect on documentation is as unplanned as every other aspect of this proposal. > (since all the ITU itself does is to organize conferences and > conventions, and to publish the documents that its members tell > them to). The right thing would also have included publishing proceedings for the Torino meeting. > If the difference between the "right thing" and the "wrong thing" > is to provide additional employment opportunities Really? Is this really what anybody thinks is going on? Rob _______________________________________________ LEAPSECS mailing list [email protected] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs
