Re coming Russian-Belarusian-Ukrainian timezone change
yury.tarasievich at gmail.com
Fri Sep 23 12:13:14 UTC 2011
Well, I still support my proposal for EEFT (East
Europe Forward Time).
My argument is EEFT looks a lot like the
previous denotation (EEST/EEDT) and is in fact
based on it, and gets sensible precedence in
lists, and is easily memorized once explained in
Also, the new element is stylistically neutral
and doesn't introduce extraneous concepts. E.g.,
the entity described isn't prevailingly "Eastern
Eastern", like in EEET proposal (Kaliningrad,
Belarus, Ukraine). Also, it seems fairly good
English (compared to FET).
I'm just against introducing a "theory" for
this. This is, by now, a once-only action, and
as we can't read the future, why bother with
anticipating? Even so, "forward" means just
"moved forward", "in advance"; but equvalising
this to daylight saving, as in Tobias theory
proposal, seems somewhat erroneous.
More information about the tz