FW: Time Zone Localizations

Olson, Arthur David (NIH/NCI) olsona at dc37a.nci.nih.gov
Tue Jun 15 13:21:40 UTC 2004


 Masayoshi Okutsu has been added to the time zone mailing list; this is a
message sent before Masayoshi was added.

				--ado 

-----Original Message-----
From: Masayoshi Okutsu [mailto:Masayoshi.Okutsu at Sun.COM] 
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2004 2:21 AM
To: Mark Davis
Cc: tz at lecserver.nci.nih.gov
Subject: Re: Time Zone Localizations

Probably I've given you a confusing example. It's not related to Japanese
locale at all. Since Paul and others have given another examples, like
"Pacific War Time". I don't think I'd need to give additional examples.

It is confusing to produce *correct* (past) local time with the current time
zone name as if the current GMT offset and DST rules were applied to the
local time.

Thanks,
Masayoshi

Mark Davis wrote:

>I am just not quite understanding what you are getting at. In CLDR, the 
>English translation of the TZID Asia/Singapore would be in the en 
>locale data; the Japanese translation of TZID Asia/Singapore would be in
the ja locale file, etc.
>(Note: we don't necessarily have the data for everything yet, but the 
>LDML format allows all of that.)
>
>The best I can make out, it sounds like what you want would be the 1942 
>Japanese names for the TZID Asia/Singapore, etc.. While it would 
>certainly be possible to do that with CLDR by providing a variant 
>locale (ja-JP-1942), it seems rather odd. When I generate a date right 
>now, and the date happens to be in the past at some time, I don't 
>generate it with the conventions that would have applied in *on that 
>date* (unless I am doing a historical novel, for example). I don't 
>write 1624-1-15 as "The Fifteenth Day of January in the Year of Our 
>Lord Nineteen-Hundred Four-and-Twenty", or whatever would have been 
>accepted usage at the time: I write it (in en_US) as "January 15th, 1624"
(or some other modern equivalent).
>
>So I must still be misunderstanding you.
>
>(Also, we looked at using the Olson TZID abbreviations, but they don't 
>appear to have wide currency -- people in the countries in question 
>didn't seem to be familiar with them -- so we decided not to use them.)
>
>Mark
>
>(BTW, I will be on a trip next week, and won't be able to reply very 
>often on this subject)
>
>__________________________________
>http://www.macchiato.com
>► शिष्यादिच्छेत्पराजयम् ◄
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Masayoshi Okutsu" <Masayoshi.Okutsu at Sun.COM>
>To: "Mark Davis" <mark.davis at jtcsv.com>
>Cc: <tz at lecserver.nci.nih.gov>
>Sent: Sun, 2004 Jun 13 05:36
>Subject: Re: Time Zone Localizations
>
>
>Probably *my* comment wasn't clear enough for you. But I believe that 
>I've been talking about the same thing as what was pointed out by Paul 
>(the second bullet of Message-id: <87isdxxm5a.fsf at penguin.cs.ucla.edu>).
>I *am* talking about the names part, not the computing part.
>
>For example, Java is capable of *computing* correct local time as of
>1942-02-16 in Asia/Singapore. However, since Java has only the last 
>time zone (display) names (i.e., "Singapore Time" and "SGT" for 
>Asia/Singapore), Java date/time formatting produces "Singapore Time" or 
>"SGT" for 1942-02-16, which should be "Japan Standard Time" or "JST".
>(tzcode is capable of producing correct abbreviations. But I didn't 
>think that abbreviation only support for historic names was appropriate 
>for Java and I didn't add them in 1.4.) I see the same issue in the 
>LDML spec in <timeZoneNames> as Java currently has.
>
>My earlier comment included the following which may explain what I'd 
>like to see in the LDML spec.
>
><timeZoneNames>
>  <zone type="America/Los_Angeles" >
>    <zoneNameSet format="SGT">
>         <long>
>              <generic>Singapore Time</generic>
>              ...
>         </long>
>         <short>
>              <generic>SGT</generic>
>              ...
>         </short>
>    </zoneNameSet>
>    ...
>    <zoneNameSet format="LMT">
>           <long>
>               <generic>Local Mean Time</generic>
>               ...
>           </long>
>           <short>
>               <generic>LMT</generic>
>               ...
>           </short>
>     </zoneNameSet>
>  </zone>
>...
></timeZoneNames>
>
>The format="..." may be problematic. But I haven't thought out any real 
>syntax for the requirement.
>
>Thanks,
>Masayoshi
>
>
>Mark Davis wrote:

>
>  
>
>>I think we may be talking past one another. LDML provide for a way to
>>    
>>
>*localize*
>  
>
>>the Olson TZIDs. For example, you can localize the term 
>>"Asia/Singapore". That latter ID  is the thing that identifies a timezone.
>>
>>It does not at all attempt to provide an alternative to *computing* 
>>the results of applying the Olson TZID to any given point in time. 
>>That is left to the implementation of the Olson time zone database. 
>>There is no need, nor desire,
>>    
>>
>to
>  
>
>>duplicate that in the LDML.
>>
>>As far as we are concerned, 'historic' time zone support simply means 
>>the ability for the time zone computation to reflect differences in 
>>behavior that existed in the past but no longer exist. An 
>>implementation that was only
>>    
>>
>limited
>  
>
>>to 'modern' time zones (like Windows, or older Java or ICU) would not 
>>be able
>>    
>>
>to
>  
>
>>distinguish between two zones that have the same behavior now, but 
>>differed at some time in the past. So the Olson time zone database 
>>encompasses historic
>>    
>>
>time
>  
>
>>zones, and has historic time zone IDs that LDML allows people to 
>>attach localizations to.
>>
>>Is that clearer?
>>
>>Mark
>>__________________________________
>>http://www.macchiato.com
>>► शिष्यादिच्छेत्पराजयम् ◄
>>
>>----- Original Message -----
>>From: "Masayoshi Okutsu" <Masayoshi.Okutsu at Sun.COM>
>>To: "Mark Davis" <mark.davis at jtcsv.com>
>>Cc: <tz at lecserver.nci.nih.gov>
>>Sent: Sat, 2004 Jun 12 07:35
>>Subject: Re: Time Zone Localizations
>>
>>
>>It's strange. I responded to your message about 13 hours ago, but it 
>>doesn't show up yet... Let me try again (with a short version).
>>
>>I believe you misunderstood my first question. It's simply an invalid 
>>assumption that a zone (in the Olson zoneinfo) represents a single 
>>time zone. How do you describe the following with the LDML spec, for
example?
>>
>># Zone  NAME            GMTOFF  RULES   FORMAT  [UNTIL]
>>Zone    Asia/Singapore  6:55:25 -       LMT     1901 Jan  1
>>                       6:55:25 -       SMT     1905 Jun  1 # Singapore
M.T.
>>                       7:00    -       MALT    1933 Jan  1 # Malaya Time
>>                       7:00    0:20    MALST   1936 Jan  1
>>                       7:20    -       MALT    1941 Sep  1
>>                       7:30    -       MALT    1942 Feb 16
>>                       9:00    -       JST     1945 Sep 12
>>                       7:30    -       MALT    1965 Aug  9 # independence
>>                       7:30    -       SGT     1982 Jan  1 # Singapore
Time
>>                       8:00    -       SGT
>>
>>If the given date is, for example, 1942-02-16, the local time zone 
>>name has to be "JST" (in the short form). I didn't think LDML would 
>>allow for defining historical time zone names. I didn't mean 
>>"historical" tome zone *IDs*. (I really don't understand "modern" and 
>>"historical" in your message, though. All of (most of?) the zones are 
>>modern. They just have their own history. And we just don't know what 
>>will happen to zones in the future. What you think is "modern" today might
be "historical"
>>tomorrow.)
>>
>>Thanks,
>>Masayoshi
>>
>>Mark Davis wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>    
>>
>>>I don't know where you are getting that. They are *not* user-defined 
>>>IDs. The text in http://www.unicode.org/reports/tr35/ defines the IDs 
>>>as matching the
>>>
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>IDs
>>
>>
>>    
>>
>>>in ftp://elsie.nci.nih.gov/pub/. See also 
>>>http://www.unicode.org/cldr/data_formats.html#Display_Names also.
>>>
>>>Mark
>>>__________________________________
>>>http://www.macchiato.com
>>>► शिष्यादिच्छेत्पराजयम् ◄
>>>
>>>----- Original Message -----
>>>From: "Masayoshi Okutsu" <Masayoshi.Okutsu at Sun.COM>
>>>To: "Mark Davis" <mark.davis at jtcsv.com>
>>>Cc: <tz at lecserver.nci.nih.gov>
>>>Sent: Fri, 2004 Jun 11 08:41
>>>Subject: Re: Time Zone Localizations
>>>
>>>
>>>Mark Davis wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>>Actually, this is directly related, since LDML is the format used for
CLDR.
>>>>However, the comment is based on a misunderstanding: LDML currently 
>>>>does
>>>>        
>>>>
>allow
>  
>
>>>>for translation of *all* of the timezone IDs, modern and historical.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>I guess you don't translate timezone IDs... Anyway, do you mean that 
>>>LDML allows users to define DTD? (Sorry if this is not a correct way 
>>>to talk about XML...) So the syntax of <zone> is really user-defined?
>>>
>>>Thanks,
>>>Masayoshi
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>>The problems we are trying to address with this proposal are that 
>>>>the sheer volume of translations is difficult to manage, *and* many 
>>>>languages just
>>>>        
>>>>
>don't
>  
>
>>>>have corresponding terms. And we didn't give guidance before as to 
>>>>which IDs were the most important to translate, so the translations 
>>>>that are in CLDR
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>were
>>
>>
>>    
>>
>>>>not done in any kind of priority order.
>>>>
>>>>Mark
>>>>__________________________________
>>>>http://www.macchiato.com
>>>>► शिष्यादिच्छेत्पराजयम् ◄
>>>>
>>>>----- Original Message -----
>>>>From: "Masayoshi Okutsu" <Masayoshi.Okutsu at Sun.COM>
>>>>To: "Mark Davis" <mark.davis at jtcsv.com>
>>>>Cc: <tz at lecserver.nci.nih.gov>
>>>>Sent: Fri, 2004 Jun 11 06:43
>>>>Subject: Re: Time Zone Localizations
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>This is a bit off from the proposal, but related to time zone
localizations.
>>>>
>>>>It appears that the Locale Data Markup Language spec for 
>>>><timeZoneNames>
>>>>(http://www.unicode.org/reports/tr35/#%3CtimeZoneNames%3E) assumes 
>>>>that a time zone has a single set of long and short names, which 
>>>>assumption is not valid if a system supports historical time zone
changes.
>>>>Actually, the time zone support in Java has this problem because it 
>>>>supports historical changes since 1.4 and always display the "latest"
>>>>time zone names. I planned to fix it in J2SE 1.5 (a.k.a. Tiger), but 
>>>>I couldn't due to another commitment.
>>>>
>>>>Is it possible for CLDR to make corrections to the <timeZoneNames> 
>>>>spec so that it can represent all historical name changes?
>>>>
>>>>Thanks,
>>>>--
>>>>Masayoshi Okutsu
>>>>Java Internationalization
>>>>Sun Microsystems (K.K.)
>>>>
>>>>Mark Davis wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>>>The common locale data repository project (CLDR) hosted by the 
>>>>>Unicode consortium (www.unicode.org/cldr/) provides for 
>>>>>translations of time zone
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>IDs,
>>
>>
>>    
>>
>>>>>based on the public domain time zone database at
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>ftp://elsie.nci.nih.gov/pub/.
>>
>>
>>    
>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>>>A
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>>>number of issues have come up concerning those translations, and we 
>>>>>have put together a proposal for changing the way that is done. The 
>>>>>goal would be to
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>>>make
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>>>changes in CLDR 1.1, which would be released around mid-October of 
>>>>>this
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>year.
>  
>
>>>>>The current version of the proposal is at:
>>>>>
>>>>>http://oss.software.ibm.com/cvs/icu/~checkout~/icuhtml/design/forma
>>>>>tting/tim
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>e
>  
>
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>_
>>
>>
>>    
>>
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>>z
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>>>one_localization.html
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>>>I'd very much appreciate any feedback on the proposal.
>>>>>
>>>>>Mark
>>>>>__________________________________
>>>>>http://www.macchiato.com
>>>>>► शिष्यादिच्छेत्पराजयम् ◄
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>    
>>
>
>
>
>  
>





More information about the tz mailing list