Hi Jesper,<br><br>Thanks for you answer, I want to let you know that currently we are using the GMT-4 time zone here at San Luis, since the last Sunday 15th at 00:00.<br>I checked the Chile DST and I think we will use the same time zone, but I will try to contact to somebody in the goverment to confirm that information.<br>
Thanks for your notes about the consistency issues and I hope the new time zone for San Luis can be added to your database after the confirmation of which time zone we will use.<br><br>Regards,<br><br>Norberto Nazabal.<br>
<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">2009/3/16 Jesper Nørgaard <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:jnorgard@prodigy.net.mx">jnorgard@prodigy.net.mx</a>></span><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div>
<div><div class="im">
<p><span><font size="2" face="Arial">Norberto Nazabal
wrote:</font></span></p>
<p><font face="Arial"><font size="2"><span>></span>Basically the law says:</font></font></p>
</div><p><font face="Arial"><font size="2"><span>></span>1) We
will use the time zone GMT-3 from the 0 hour <span>of </span>the second Sunday of October to the 24 hours
of the secon<span>d</span> Saturday of
April.</font></font></p>
<p><font face="Arial"><font size="2"><span>></span>2) We
will use the time zone GMT-4 from the 0 hour <span>of </span>the second Sunday of April to the 24 hours of
the secon<span>d</span> Saturday of
October.</font></font></p>
<p><span><font size="2" face="Arial">I agree that this is
an accurate translation of the document which was published already back in
December 2008. However this definition contains serious problems of consistency.
And not only that, if this was published so long back (2-3 months) why was it
not followed in 2009, but rather following the Chile DST and Buenos Aires
Argentinian DST instead with a frantic press conference the Thursday before
the weekend when it was implemented?</font></span></p>
<p><span><font size="2" face="Arial">The problem of
consistency is the perhaps not obvious fact that the Second Saturday of a month
at 24:00 is *not* always the same time as the Second Sunday at 0:00 of a
month. Thus the above definition is not always defining two contiguous periods
(DST and non-DST) as one might think. I am sure this is an attempt to give an
intuitive definition where one period goes to the 24:00 hours of one day, and is
replaced with a new period starting at 0:00 hour the next day, but it fails. The
first problem will occur in 2012 where the Second Saturday is <a href="http://14.th" target="_blank">14.th</a>. of April
while the Second Sunday is the <a href="http://8.th" target="_blank">8.th</a>. of April (e.g. the problem occurs when the
first in the month is a Sunday). So literally the definition will have it that
GMT-3 will be followed from 2011-10-09 00:00:00 to 2012-04-14 24:00:00 and
GMT-4 will be followed from 2012-04-08 00:00:00 : During a week we have both
GMT-3 and GMT-4 ??</font></span></p>
<p><span><font size="2" face="Arial">The most probable
scenarios are that either San Luis redefines the decree in a consistent way, or
that either Chile DST or Argentina DST is followed. The future will tell.
Already in October 2009 the two latter are different, Chile starts DST
2009-10-11 00:00:00 and Buenos Aires starts DST 2009-10-18
00:00:00.</font></span></p>
<p><span><font size="2" face="Arial">Regards,</font></span><span><font size="2" face="Arial"> Jesper Nørgaard Welen</font></span></p></div></div>
<br>
<p><font size="2">No virus found in this outgoing message.<br>
Checked by AVG.<br>
Version: 7.5.557 / Virus Database: 270.11.15/2003 - Release Date: 2009-03-15 14:07<br>
</font> </p>
</blockquote></div><br>