My understanding of the consensus for the front-running change option, if
indeed there is to be a change, is that it would be to insert no new leap
seconds after N years, where N is something between five and ten. However
let me make it clear that I am not an organizer of this conference, am not a
member of the ITU Special Rapporteur's Group, and am not planning on being
the US Naval Observatory's attendee at the conference.
If you can't attend the meeting I strongly recommend you make your issues
known through whatever relevant international body best represents you.
My personal official positions with regards to UTC definition are two: I am
chair of the URSI working group and a fairly inactive member of the IAU
working group. As the manager of this listserv, I of course informally
refer to and summarize the content and flavor of these emails, as
appropriate. I enjoy doing this, although I admit I was a little concerned
when it appeared possible that one exchange might lead to derogatory
comments between contributors. Fortunately, that stayed under control
without my having to do anything.
Demetrios
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Steve Allen [mailto:sla_at_UCOLICK.ORG]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 12, 2003 5:00 AM
> To: LEAPSECS_at_ROM.USNO.NAVY.MIL
> Subject: Re: [LEAPSECS] Forthcoming Meeting of ITU-R SRG Colloquium on
> UTC Time Scale
>
>
> On Tue 2003-02-11T16:43:30 -0500,
> matsakis.demetrios_at_usno.navy.mil hath writ:
>
> > The SRG has held several coordination and
> > technical exchange meetings to generate,
> > analyze and discuss alternative approaches to
> > reduce or eliminate the operational impact of
> > the leap second. The work to date has
> > produced a consensual opinion that the SRG
> > wants to present and discuss with interested
> > and representative parties.
>
> Is it possible for any of this "consensual opinion" to be revealed in
> advance of the meeting, or must it really be kept a secret until then?
>
> > It does not include a call for papers, but the organizers
> will be soliciting
> > them. They hope to be able to announce the invited
> speakers and session
> > structure shortly. The organizers are especially interested in
> > contributions that can quantify the software costs and
> savings associated
> > with any change, particularly the possibility of inserting
> now new leap
> > seconds after N years.
>
> In the absence of a motivating factor (such as knowing that the
> "consensual opinion" will cost them lots of money in the short term)
> it is fantasy to expect that many observatory directors can be
> convinced to send someone to Italy to make a presentation on this.
>
> --
> Steve Allen UCO/Lick Observatory Santa Cruz, CA 95064
> sla_at_ucolick.org Voice: +1 831 459 3046
http://www.ucolick.org/~sla
PGP: 1024/E46978C5 F6 78 D1 10 62 94 8F 2E 49 89 0E FE 26 B4 14 93
Received on Wed Feb 12 2003 - 08:28:45 PST