<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:'times new roman',serif">While there have been a flurry of proposals on this list, the current process and format has worked just fine for many years. For every person pleased by any of these proposals, I strongly suspect there will be at least one other displeased—and probably many. (The people who are likely to complain are also more likely to be members of this list, while those who are content with the current system are less likely.)</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:'times new roman',serif"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:'times new roman',serif">So on the principle that "if it ain't broke, don't fix it", we'd be better off just leaving the system as is.</div>
</div><div class="gmail_extra"><br clear="all"><div><font face="'times new roman', serif"><div style="background-color:transparent;margin-top:0px;margin-left:0px;margin-bottom:0px;margin-right:0px"><div></div></div>
<div style="background-color:transparent;margin-top:0px;margin-left:0px;margin-bottom:0px;margin-right:0px"><br></div><div style="background-color:transparent;margin-top:0px;margin-left:0px;margin-bottom:0px;margin-right:0px">
<a href="https://plus.google.com/114199149796022210033" target="_blank">Mark</a></div><div style="background-color:transparent;margin-top:0px;margin-left:0px;margin-bottom:0px;margin-right:0px"><i><br></i></div><div style="background-color:transparent;margin-top:0px;margin-left:0px;margin-bottom:0px;margin-right:0px">
<i>— Il meglio è l’inimico del bene —</i></div></font><div><div><font face="'times new roman', serif"><i><span style="font-style:normal"><i></i></span><i></i></i></font></div></div></div>
<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 3:31 PM, Clive D.W. Feather <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:clive@davros.org" target="_blank">clive@davros.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div class="im"><a href="mailto:random832@fastmail.us">random832@fastmail.us</a> said:<br>
> Why do we have zones that track _cities'_ movements from one timezone to<br>
> another?<br>
<br>
</div>We don't.<br>
<br>
We *define* a timezone as being a geographical area where all the clocks<br>
should always show the same time since 1970. Therefore a city *never* moves<br>
from one timezone to another. If a geographical area should have clocks<br>
showing different times in (say) April 1996, then that area contains more<br>
than one time zone.<br>
<br>
We do *NOT* use "timezone" to refer to *concepts* like "Eastern Standard<br>
Time" or "British Summer Time"; let alone "North American Eastern Time".<br>
(I think we have GMT+/-N zones, but that's because they are used at sea and<br>
so have geographic meaning.)<br>
<br>
We could add such zones, but these would be *additional* timezones. A city<br>
would not move from the NACT zone to the NAET zone; rather, it remains in<br>
its own zone, which shows the same time as NACT before the transition date<br>
and the same time as NAET after it.<br>
<span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><br>
--<br>
Clive D.W. Feather | If you lie to the compiler,<br>
Email: <a href="mailto:clive@davros.org">clive@davros.org</a> | it will get its revenge.<br>
Web: <a href="http://www.davros.org" target="_blank">http://www.davros.org</a> | - Henry Spencer<br>
Mobile: <a href="tel:%2B44%207973%20377646" value="+447973377646">+44 7973 377646</a><br>
</font></span></blockquote></div><br></div>