> It should be clear that the gaps and repeats are fictitious, especially
> if you think of AEST and AEDT as existing beyond the times when they are
> in legal use.  Putting it in practical terms, suppose I have a traffic
> accident at 0230 on 2006/04/02, what time will the police officer write
> in his report?  For most times of the year he can omit the timezone spec
> because there is no legal ambiguity, but to do so for this specific hour
> would be insufficient, he must specify AEDT or AEST.

There are two instances of 0230 but only one
0230 EST and one 0230 EDT. So that could take
care of the ambiguity, if the officer were clever.

Or he could use UTC/GMT/Zulu, if the office had a
military background.

Or, how about this for a laugh... Suppose DST were
implemented with +/- leap hours. Consider if the DST
switch were made around midnight instead of 2 AM.

Then the Spring DST change would jump from 22:59 to
00:00 skipping the 60 minutes labeled 23:00 to 23:59.
The Fall DST would be implemented after 23:59 where
and extra 60 minutes labeled 24:00 to 24:59 would be
added. That takes care of your EST/EDT ambiguity...

/tvb
http://www.LeapHour.com

Reply via email to