[tz] Add new timezone for Hanoi Capital, Vietnam
khaiphan9x at gmail.com
Mon Feb 18 17:07:19 UTC 2019
It is possible to link Hanoi to Asia/Ho_Chi_Minh instead of Asia/Bangkok as
the logic you say will be better. The above-mentioned criteria seem to be
ignored, although it is quite reasonable. North Vietnam uses time zones
imposed, there is no document saying that North Vietnam accepted
Asia/Bangkok as a representative time zone. However, I did not change the
idea that Hanoi is the best representative for Vietnam, although I do not
have the right to change anything.
Vào 23:52, Th 2, 18 thg 2, 2019 Tim Parenti <tim at timtimeonline.com đã viết:
> On Mon, 18 Feb 2019 at 11:37, KP <khaiphan9x at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Countries including Cambodia, Laos and South Vietnam (regardless of
>> agreement) have their own time zones, except North Vietnam. Is it an
>> omission or bias?
> Not really. Cambodia and Laos are linked to Asia/Bangkok as well:
> # Thailand
> # Zone NAME GMTOFF RULES FORMAT [UNTIL]
> Zone Asia/Bangkok 6:42:04 - LMT 1880
> 6:42:04 - BMT 1920 Apr # Bangkok Mean
> 7:00 - +07
> Link Asia/Bangkok Asia/Phnom_Penh # Cambodia
> Link Asia/Bangkok Asia/Vientiane # Laos
> That said, it does look like Asia/Hanoi (which currently exists in the
> backzone file) should indeed be linked here as well for the same reasons,
> since Asia/Ho_Chi_Minh does differ from these from 1970 to 1975. It would
> appear that was an oversight due to the various complexities.
> Commentary should also be added in the Vietnam section of the file, if the
> link isn't added there. Or perhaps this is indeed a complex enough case to
> warrant bringing Asia/Hanoi out of backzone. Either way, the name should
> be in the main distribution somewhere, since Asia/Ho_Chi_Minh is not
> representative of Vietnam alone.
> On Mon, 18 Feb 2019 at 10:13, Clive D.W. Feather <clive at davros.org> wrote:
>> Hmm, do we need another zone for that? Or will there be a string of such
>> zones as the border moved south? I don't know the history of Vietnam well
>> enough to know.
> I should hope that in post-1970 cases of incremental territorial shifts,
> we can treat this a bit like we treat Asia/Urumqi: The geographical
> boundaries are/were fluid/undefined, and you simply choose the file that
> adheres to whichever timescale is most appropriate for your situation. The
> line between limiting ourselves to the two "major" zones and creating a new
> zone for each city as it was captured may be fuzzy, but I'm pretty
> confident that line exists somewhere in there.
> Tim Parenti
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the tz