[LEAPSECS] The relation between calendars and leap seconds.

Nero Imhard nimh at pipe.nl
Thu Nov 13 14:34:41 EST 2008



On 2008-11-13, at 15:07, Rob Seaman wrote:

>

> Hmmm. Forget about the details of the two main positions

> historically prevalent on this list. Call them position "A" and

> position "B", rather than "leap seconds must die!" and "friend of

> mean solar time", respectively.


I read this list quite differently. The core of the ITU/UTC-issue
seems to be whether it is appropriate/ethical/allowed to change the
definition of a widely used existing time scale in mid-flight rather
than construct new or use existing time scales according to whatever
requirements you may have (and others may not have).

As I see it, the two main positions on this particular issue are X:
"definitions may change" and Y: "are you silly?", but this is somewhat
obscured by discussions about the merits of leap seconds (only natural
for this list).

I don't need to care deeply about leap seconds to vehemenently oppose X.

N




More information about the LEAPSECS mailing list