overlapping of rules? - Palestine
Michael Deckers
michael.deckers at yahoo.com
Wed Oct 13 21:53:39 UTC 2010
On 2010-10-13 18:29, Arthur David Olson wrote
on superfluous time zone rules:
> (Note that the time zone compiler notices that nothing
> changes on the first Friday of September, 2010 and does
> not produce any "extra" output.)
Yes, obviously a switch to winter time directly after
another switch to winter time should not hurt. But
such "overlapping" switches may confuse a human
reader, and in some (imaginary) cases, even the
compiler.
Consider a rule like
# Rule NAME FROM TO TYPE IN ON AT SAVE
Rule Palestine 2009 max - Mar lastFri 0:00 1
It says that summer time is used from its value
[a] 2009-03-27 + 01 h onwards
if winter time has applied before that instant. If
summer time had already applied before that instant,
then the rule would say that summer time is used
from its value
[b] 2009-03-27 + 00 h onwards
which is, in fact, one hour earlier.
Together with the (fictitious) "overlapping" rule
# Rule NAME FROM TO TYPE IN ON AT SAVE
Rule Palestine 2009 only - Mar 26 23:30 1
which specifies summer time from
[c] 2009-03-27 + 00:30 h onwards,
the interpretation becomes doubtful: if the
second rule [c] is honored, then [a] cannot really
apply because local time never took the value
2009-03-27 + 00 h; but [b] implies that [c]
cannot apply because local time could never
have taken the value 2009-03-26 + 23:30 h.
I am not saying that this is a real problem --
I am just proposing to avoid any "overlapping"
(useless and potentially confusing) rules.
Michael Deckers.
More information about the tz
mailing list