On Wed, Jan 04, 2006 at 08:24:39PM +, Ed Mirmak wrote:
> Those who have submitted data, plots, or descriptions of system response to
> the leap second addition may want to forward those messages to ITU WP-7A.
>
> Related to the Nov 2005 U.S. proposal to the ITU to redefine UTC and
> abandon leap seconds, they are soliciting information from various sources
> on both positive and negative experiences.
>
> See:
>
> http://www.bipm.fr/en/scientific/tai/future_utc.html
>
> http://www.bipm.fr/utils/en/pdf/ITU-R_leapseconds_letter.pdf
>
> They give two different e-mail addresses. From the first web page:
> "Responses can be sent before 13 February 2006 to [EMAIL PROTECTED],
> indicating 'UTC consultation' in the subject of the message."
>
> >From the letter, e-mail address is:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
This is so sadly typical of this whole closed ITU process. The letter
and request, dated December 7, 2005, took over a month to reach the
leapsecs list, the open list of people with a deep interest in and
experience in the subject. The PDF letter itself is unnecessarily
hard to forward, archive, search, translate or use because it is in
scanned image format, not e.g. text or HTML.
When was this actually published? E.g. I find no links via google to
http://www.bipm.fr/en/scientific/tai/future_utc.html
And the proposal itself remains unavailable outside the inner circle
as far as I've seen, despite requests from me and others to open it
up. All I get when I go to their page
http://www.itu.int/md/meetingdoc.asp?type=sitems&lang=e&parent=R03-WP7A-C-0021
and request a document is a request for a "TIES account", whatever
that is.
I urge people to share their reports openly with the world by posting
them on the web and sending them to the leapsecs list or other open
forums. And I urge the ITU to open up their process.
http://rom.usno.navy.mil/archives/leapsecs.html
http://www.mail-archive.com/leapsecs@rom.usno.navy.mil/
Neal McBurnett http://bcn.boulder.co.us/~neal/
