On Sep 30, 2014, at 8:27 AM, Michael Spacefalcon <[email protected]> wrote:
> Tony Finch <[email protected]> wrote: > >> And I seem to remember from reading the materials that they also ignored >> the cultural damage that was done by the introduction of leap seconds in >> the first place, breaking a multi-thousand-year tradition of base 60 >> fractions, making all mechanical clocks obsolete, and so on. > > Red herring, the problem you are describing only occurs if you feed > the leap seconds "raw" directly to end users, which one should NOT do; > instead the LSs need to be passed through a smoothing function like > UTC-SLS or Leap Smear before being presented to non-technical end > users. So you are saying that the UTC standard is so broken that you have to invent your own, which is not standardized by any standards body[*], to get around it? UTC is the required time base for business and has some odd quirks which mean that to comply with it you have to be an expert on the esoteric quirks of UTC, like the 61 second minute. Saying that it has to be sanitized before feeding it to the end user says implies that the standard isn’t really a standard and you have to “fake it” by some weird means to keep user’s happy. Sounds rather damning indictment of the standard, if you ask me. Warner [*] UTS-SLS is not a standard, never has been standardized and a number of variations based on who reinvented the idea and has no sanction for the international standards bodies.
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
_______________________________________________ LEAPSECS mailing list [email protected] https://pairlist6.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs
