In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Ed Davies writes: >Wow, things have got really stirred up around here. Lots of interesting >points but I'll just concentrate on one... > >Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: >> Well, the BIPM doesn't really want anybody to use TAI, their director >> said as much last year, and I can see where he is coming from on that >> one. > >Since the usual response of the pro-leap second lobby to people >who want a uniform timescale is "use TAI" this is significant. >Do you have any information or references on why the BIPM director >said this?
As I understood it, it was mainly that TAI is a post-factum "postal" timescale. -- 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.
