[tz] EST/EDT vs AEST/AEDT in AQ
mail.2012 at tobiasconradi.com
Tue Apr 16 01:47:50 UTC 2013
On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 2:58 AM, Guy Harris <guy at alum.mit.edu> wrote:
> On Apr 15, 2013, at 7:59 AM, Tobias Conradi <mail.2012 at tobiasconradi.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 4:02 PM, Clive D.W. Feather <clive at davros.org> wrote:
>>> What we actually want to know is what Lord Howians actually use.
>> Why? Me not. Localization is out of scope of the database. This belongs to CLDR.
> Another way to think about this is to say
> The abbreviations supplied by the tz database are the abbreviations appropriate for the C locale.
I guess "C locale" is not restricted Lord Howe English.
LHDT and LHHDT are both abbreviations, or more precise acronyms, based
on English language words. So both would fulfill the English language
requirement and current practice to use this language as acronym
But only LHHDT is consistent with the current practice for
- 0:30 saving xHDT or xHST
- 1:00 saving xDT or xST.
> For any other locale, go to CLDR.
> And, yes, this argues that implementations of the tzname array, and of strftime(), in UN*X systems should contain more code than just what you get with tzcode, so that it goes to the CLDR for time zone abbreviations for locales other than the C locale.
It would be convenient if strftime would return MEZ instead of CET.
This might be even more important for non-Latin script writing
Rheinsberger Str. 18
More information about the tz