In message <[email protected]>, "Daniel R. Tobias" writes : >On 17 Jan 2012 at 20:59, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > >> A lot of technical treaties and regulations say UTC in no uncertain words, >> for instance in air-space regulations. I am pretty certain that creating >> a new timescale and mandating its transmission over for instance WWV[B] and >> DCF77 would give a lot of interesting issues where ATC facilities are >> time synchronized to the new scale, but should have been to the UTC scale. > >And why are those legal issues more significant than the ones that >will arise with respect to other laws, treaties, regulations, >standards documents, etc., that specify GMT or some other form of >solar time, once a redefined UTC (or whatever it's called then) no >longer closely tracks it?
I am pretty sure that at this point everybody read "GMT" as "UTC" in those treaties, if they have not already been fixed. With respect to national laws, they are N times easier to fix than an international treaty, and therefore much less of a concern. -- 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
