proposed tz patches for Indiana, New Brunswick, Gaza, etc.

[Paul Schauble]

I am inclined to think you should implement the letter of the law rather
than guessing what DOT "really" meant. Either that or ask DOT for
clarification. I hate to say it, but I've been involved in similar things
that became a legal issue and the difference can matter.

Unfortunately, this conflicts with the deadline. Maybe I'm a bit paranoid,
but I'd ask.

    ++PLS

-----Original Message-----
From: tz-request at elsie.nci.nih.gov [mailto:tz-request at elsie.nci.nih.gov] On
Behalf Of Deborah Goldsmith
Sent: Friday, January 20, 2006 7:08 PM
To: tz at lecserver.nci.nih.gov
Subject: Re: proposed tz patches for Indiana, New Brunswick, Gaza, etc.

On Jan 20, 2006, at 2:59 PM, Paul Eggert wrote:

> +			-5:00	-	EST	2006 Apr  2 2:00
> +			-6:00	US	C%sT

For all the Indiana counties that are switching from ET to CT, shouldn't
this be:

+			-5:00	-	EST	2006 Apr  2 2:00
+			-5:00	-	CDT	2006 Apr  2 3:00
+			-6:00	US	C%sT

so that the time will proceed smoothly from 1:59:59 AM EST to 2:00:00 AM
CDT, as proposed by Paul Eggert?

With the rules the way they are now, the time will go from 1:59:59 AM EST to
1:00:00 AM CST, then from 1:59:59 AM CST to 3:00:00 AM CDT.  
Personally, I'm fine either way.

Deborah