Re: Time after Time

2005-01-23 Thread Markus Kuhn
Poul-Henning Kamp wrote on 2005-01-23 09:00 UTC: any leap hours that prevented this would, if ever implemented, be even more traumatic than leap seconds are now. they already happen here twice a year, and by now even Microsoft has gotten it right. OBJECTION, your Time Lords! UTC currently

Re: Time after Time

2005-01-23 Thread John Cowan
Markus Kuhn scripsit: UTC currently certainly has *no* two 1-h leaps every year. There seems to be persistent confusion on what is meant by the term leap hour. I understand it as a secular change to the various LCT offsets, made either all at once (on 1 Jan 2600, say) or on an ad-lib basis.

Re: two world clocks AND Time after Time

2005-01-23 Thread Steve Allen
On Thu 2005-01-20T14:59:18 -0700, Rob Seaman hath writ: Leap seconds are a perfectly workable mechanism. Systems that don't need time-of-day should use TAI. Systems that do need time-of-day often benefit from the 0.9s approximation to UT1 that UTC currently provides. Let's stop pretending