[tz] EST/EDT vs AEST/AEDT in AQ [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

Tim Parenti tim at timtimeonline.com
Fri Apr 12 15:20:32 UTC 2013


On 12 April 2013 10:57, Tobias Conradi <mail.2012 at tobiasconradi.com> wrote:

> On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 4:40 PM, Tim Parenti <tim at timtimeonline.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > On 12 April 2013 04:45, Tobias Conradi <mail.2012 at tobiasconradi.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> D for %s never means anything else than 1:00 saving.
> >
> >
> > Within the current tz database, sure, that is presently the case.  But
> this
> > is not necessarily the case within ACTUAL practice;
> Sure, actual practice in the IANA time zone database.
>
> > "D" could conceivably be
> > used to refer to a DST offset of any amount, since it is still "daylight
> > saving time", just of a different amount.
> Against actual practice in the IANA time zone database, deteriorating
> usability for those that rely use systematization.
>

It would appear you misunderstood or misinterpreted my statements.  The
ONLY "actual practice" which is relevant is the actual practice on the
ground, independent of tz.  If I understood your statement correctly, this
is the opposite of what you said.


> >  To be clear, I haven't seen any evidence either way, but I
> > don't particularly believe any residents of Lord Howe Island would call
> it
> > "Lord Howe half-daylight time", because to them, half an hour is a full
> > transition.
> Does that matter?


As above, yes.  What the locals call it should be the ONLY practice that
matters.  While I am sympathetic to your desires for broader
systematization, it is not the aim of this project.


> > I am not making the argument here that the terminology is used this way
> in
> > Australia/Lord_Howe; only that if it is, then LHDT is a perfectly
> suitable
> > (and indeed, preferred) abbreviation for UTC+10:30+0:30 as observed
> there in
> > the summer.
> Why? For other regions the database does not care at all about local
> usage and will certainly fail in bilingual environments.



> > On 12 April 2013 04:22, Tobias Conradi <tobias.conradi at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> > We are not inventing anything new
> >> It has been proven you do in the scope of the DB.
> >
> >
> > I have not been part of this project for very long, but I believe most of
> > the "invented" abbreviations have been simply to fulfill POSIX
> requirements
> > where no commonly-used English terminology previously existed.
> POSIX requirements for abbreviations can be fulfilled without English
> terminology. E.g. WIT could mean Waktu Indonesia Timur (Eastern
> Indonesian Time) instead of IANA used English Western Indonesia Time.
>
> The English speaking countries largely get their way through with
> locally used abbreviations, whilst needs and wishes of others are
> ignored.


Again, I haven't been around for long, but according to my understanding of
this project's history, it is solely an English-language project.
 Localization issues are outside of its scope.

--
Tim Parenti
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/tz/attachments/20130412/77921772/attachment.htm>


More information about the tz mailing list