Tim Diggins tim at
Mon Dec 7 19:39:02 UTC 2009

I'm not an expert in this area, but here are my observations from a  
distance FWIW.

It seems like there's a problem with trying to find a "city in the  
region" for the national/official timezone - the region for that is  
the whole of china and the biggest city is Beijing. And according to  
the article (and other journalistic sources), people seem to orient to  
the "Xinjiang" (local) time and "Beijing" time.

On 7 Dec 2009, at 17:46, Eric Muller <emuller at> wrote:

We already have a beijing time (or at least a PRC time). We need a  
Xinjiang time. Why have a Wulumuqi time at all? There is no "separate  
wulumuqi timezone".


On 7 Dec 2009, at 17:55, Robert Elz <kre at munnari.OZ.AU> wrote:

>    Date:        Mon, 7 Dec 2009 22:45:33 +0600
>    From:        Luther Ma <ma.lude.xj at>
>    Message-ID:  <C447F652-CB6B-4518-B009-83898D10C41A at>
>  | One thing I wonder about is exactly what "zone" refers to. The  
> reason
>  | I ask is that Han living in Xinjiang would not say that they are in
>  | the Urumqi (or Wulumuqi) zone as far as time is concerned. Does it
>  | refer instead an area and population center first and then to a  
> time
>  | zone second?
> It is (except in a few rare cases that cause problems, mostly in South
> America I think) the Anglophile name of the biggest population centre
> (city or town) within the same country, that has a particular  
> wallclock
> time (and history).
> Timezones themselves tend not to actually have names in many places,
> it is just "the time" - but cities and towns generally always have  
> names,
> and it is very rare for a single city or time to have two different
> timezones (the ones under discussion being one odd case.)
> kre
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...

More information about the tz mailing list