On Jan 7, 2014, at 5:50 PM, Brooks Harris wrote:

> On 2014-01-07 03:58 PM, Warner Losh wrote:
>> On Jan 7, 2014, at 4:56 PM, Brooks Harris wrote:
>> 
>>> Oh yes, I've see that. Noted from this list. To me its both hysterical and 
>>> deeply troubling. On the one hand, it bemuses me to see someone else's 
>>> programming pain so well presented, mirroring my own, and, on the other, oh 
>>> isn't there please something we could do about it?
>> Doubtful :(.
>> 
>> I could likely do a similar rant about leap seconds from a programmer's 
>> perspective of similar length too....
>> 
>> Warner
> 
> Yeah, I'm sure most on this list have similar experience. Hey, we could start 
> a reality tv show!

Leap second war story death match!

Warner

> -Brooks
> 
>> 
>> 
>>> On 2014-01-07 03:40 PM, Warner Losh wrote:
>>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-5wpm-gesOY is required viewing.
>>>> 
>>>> Warner
>>>> 
>>>> On Jan 7, 2014, at 4:22 PM, Brooks Harris wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>> 
>>>>> First, this is my first posting to your list, forgive me if the subject 
>>>>> has been covered.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Second, I am a colleague Stephen Scott, also a new subscriber who posted 
>>>>> a question earlier this week - (Subject: Local insertion of leap seconds).
>>>>> 
>>>>> My question is about the current state of standards concerning time zones.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Steve Allen's "Time Scales" 
>>>>> http://www.ucolick.org/~sla/leapsecs/timescales.html 
>>>>> <http://www.ucolick.org/%7Esla/leapsecs/timescales.html> is a tremendous 
>>>>> help in many regards, and my thanks and appreciation for the work 
>>>>> collected there. But it seems to side-step explanation of time zones, and 
>>>>> its here I'm asking for guidance.
>>>>> 
>>>>> I fully understand time zone specifications are fractured. My objective 
>>>>> is to determine what standards are most relevant currently, that is, what 
>>>>> standards may be considered "in force". And where none exist, to state 
>>>>> some sort of rules of "common use" or "common practice" without referring 
>>>>> to the impossibly large collection of local jurisdictions and laws.
>>>>> 
>>>>> In particular -
>>>>> 
>>>>> A) "International Date Line", which is probably not standardized except 
>>>>> by local decree, but the "180 degrees from the Greenwich meridian" has 
>>>>> provenance back to the "International Meridian Conference of 1884" (not 
>>>>> its proper name). Is there more modern standard that codifies this in any 
>>>>> way?
>>>>> 
>>>>> B) The "International Meridian Conference of 1884" contains significant 
>>>>> discussion of the idea "That these standard meridians should continue to 
>>>>> be designated as even multiples of fifteen degrees from Greenwich", but 
>>>>> there appears to be no explicit resolution of vote on the topic. I am 
>>>>> unable to pick up the trail from there. There are many references in 
>>>>> other conferences preceding and after the 1984 conference, but I have not 
>>>>> discovered any official action on the subject. Again, is there any modern 
>>>>> standard regarding that issue?
>>>>> 
>>>>> ISO 8601 describes using "offset from UTC" to indicate "time zone", but 
>>>>> as far as I can tell it does not state either what a "time zone" may be 
>>>>> or why an offset to a "time zone" from UTC might be useful. Is there any 
>>>>> other standard that might describe this relation of UTC (zulu) to the 
>>>>> "time zone" or "local time" more rigorously?
>>>>> 
>>>>> Of course the definition of "Greenwich meridian" has undergone many 
>>>>> refinements and name changes since 1884. Claude Boucher describes the 
>>>>> state of Formal international recognition of the International 
>>>>> Terrestrial Reference System (ITRS)
>>>>> 
>>>>> https://www.google.com/#q=Formal+international+recognition+of+the+International+Terrestrial+Reference+System+(ITRS).
>>>>> 
>>>>> Are there descriptions of "time zones" amongst the standards in this 
>>>>> field?
>>>>> 
>>>>> And, of course, there is the subject of "Daylight Savings", apparently 
>>>>> begun by George Vernon Hudson. Are there any modern standards or 
>>>>> implementation guidance documents in force?
>>>>> 
>>>>> I'm aware of tz databse, of course, but here too there seems to be lack 
>>>>> of clarity about what rules are being implemented, or, at least, I've 
>>>>> found no consolidated statements of those rules there.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Comments and guidence welcomed, thanks very much,
>>>>> 
>>>>> -Brooks Harris
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> LEAPSECS mailing list
>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> LEAPSECS mailing list
>>>> [email protected]
>>>> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> LEAPSECS mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs
>> _______________________________________________
>> LEAPSECS mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs
>> 
>> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> LEAPSECS mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs

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

Reply via email to