Re coming Russian-Belarusian-Ukrainian timezone change

Yury Tarasievich yury.tarasievich at
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 
tzdata record.

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 mailing list