Markus Kuhn said: >> A resolution was proposed to redefine UTC by replacing leap seconds by leap >> hours, effective at a specific date which I believe was something like 2020.
[...] > If this proposal gets accepted, then someone will have to shoulder the > burden and take responsibility for a gigantic disruption in the > global^Wsolar IT infrastructure sometimes around 2600. I believe, the > worry about Y2K was nothing in comparison to the troubles caused by a > UTC leap hour. We certainly couldn't insert a leap hour into UTC today. > > In my eyes, a UTC leap hour is an unrealistic phantasy. [...] I may be wrong here, but I thought the "leap hour" idea did *not* insert a discontinuity into UTC. Rather, in 2600 (or whenever it is), all civil administrations would move their <local>-UTC offset forward by one hour, in many cases by failing to implement the summer-to-winter step back. Thus in the UK and the US eastern seaboard, the civil time would go: UK US east Summer 2599: UTC + 0100 UTC - 0400 Winter 2599/2600: UTC + 0000 UTC - 0500 Summer 2600: UTC + 0100 UTC - 0400 Winter 2600/2601: UTC + 0100 UTC - 0400 Summer 2601: UTC + 0200 UTC - 0300 Winter 2601/2602: UTC + 0200 UTC - 0400 That *is* practical to implement, though coordination might be harder. On the other hand, adminstrative areas that are near the edge of a zone now could move earlier if they wanted. The world is used to time zones, after all. -- Clive D.W. Feather | Work: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | Tel: +44 20 8495 6138 Internet Expert | Home: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | Fax: +44 870 051 9937 Demon Internet | WWW: http://www.davros.org | Mobile: +44 7973 377646 Thus plc | |