Rob Seaman scripsit:
> I just continue to enjoy the fact that folks
> with completely opposite points of view about civil timekeeping have
> the same low opinion about leap hours :-)
Feel free to adopt the acronym "ALHP".
> ...and Algeria had the freedom to do so precisely because UTC existed
> to function as a worldwide civil timescale that continued
> uninterrupted "in the background" while the local authorities
> extemporized. Presumably you would assert that TI (TAI + constant)
> could serve this same purpose.
Indeed.
> I disagree that interval time can indefinitely serve
> as a stand-in for solar time. It is when the first leap hour (or
> timezone migration event) occurs that interval time fails the test.
> And precisely because it is a timescale that is designed to simply
> tick, tick, tick in even intervals.
I agree wrt leap hours, but why wrt timezone migrations? TI ticks
steadily, local time jumps about as local requirements demand;
both agree on the size of the second. This will break down when
timezone migrations occur too often, but then we will have to do
something else altogether.
> >By the way, I re-counted all the secular time zone transitions
> >worldwide. According to the Olson timezone database, there have
> >been 516 of them since the beginning of standard time (when that
> >is, of course, varies with the country or subdivision thereof).
>
> I think we're using the word "secular" in different ways:
Yeah, we went through this before, and I'm abusing "secular" to mean
"aperiodic". Excluding DST transitions, there are 516 timezone
changes in the Olson files. Some of these are really duplicates
because the Olson data merges zones that have had the same history
since 1970, but only if they are currently in the same country;
currently separate countries are always treated separately.
--
John Cowan www.ccil.org/~cowan www.reutershealth.com cowan_at_ccil.org
All "isms" should be "wasms". --Abbie
Received on Mon Jan 16 2006 - 20:44:11 PST