On 2014-01-17 04:06 AM, Zefram wrote:
E) Because "Leap Seconds" are at the center of the "kill Leap
Seconds" debate,
...
we also rename (our beloved) "Leap Seconds".
Respelling isn't going to fool most of the people in this debate.
Nobody is trying to fool anybody. I think there are several reasons to
change the name -
A) If you establish a new timescale that includes the "Leap Seconds
mechanism" you'd better rename it to make it clear its part of this new
timescale, not some other.
B) As I've suggested CCT, with its proleptic UTC/TAI, and recognizing
how that NTP includes the a Leap Seconds, we are actually using the
"Leap Second mechanism" in the proleptic portion of the timescale. That
is not "Leap Seconds" proper. Better rename it.
C) The CCT timescale will need to define clear rules how "Leap Seconds"
apply to "local time". This is not addressed by the existing "Leap
Seconds" definition(s). Better rename it.
-Brooks
_______________________________________________
LEAPSECS mailing list
LEAPSECS@leapsecond.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs
