Re: [LEAPSECS] The real problem with leap seconds

From: Mark Calabretta <mcalabre_at_ATNF.CSIRO.AU>
Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 12:27:46 +1100

On Fri 2006/01/13 16:45:33 -0000, Michael Deckers wrote
in a message to: LEAPSECS_at_ROM.USNO.NAVY.MIL

> Right, UTC timestamps are ambiguous (in the sense that the

... would have been ambiguous ...

> corresponding TAI value is not known) in the vicinity of
> positive leap seconds, and the notation with a second
> field >= 60 s is one (elegant) way to disambiguate.

... had not the variable-radix notation not been introduced.

> Another way to disambiguate is to record the value of DTAI
> together with a UTC (or TAI) timestamp. Such a method is
> standardised in ISO 8601 for denoting offsets from UTC,
> but only with minute resolution. I seem to remember that
> Clive Feather once proposed this for an extension to the
> C programming language.

... where UTC here is taken to be in the usual (fixed-radix) sexagesimal
format.

Mark Calabretta
ATNF
Received on Sun Jan 15 2006 - 17:28:05 PST