[tz] Proposal to use Asia/Tel_Aviv for Israel - Jerusalem is not internationally recognized as part of Israel

[David Patte ₯]

Perfect. I fully agree.


On 2013-05-08 4:52, Alan Barrett wrote:
> On Tue, 07 May 2013, random832 at fastmail.us wrote:
>> At the risk of annoying people by continuing this discussion, I'm 
>> confused what the supposed cost of this change actually is.
>
> I had not noticed, until your message, that there was already an 
> Asia/Tel_Aviv zone, so I had incorrectly assumed that changing the 
> representative city for Israel would be more costly.  I suspect that 
> some of the objections were derived from a similar misunderstanding.
>
>> Both names already exist in the database, which makes it even less of 
>> a cost than renaming a timezone (and leaving an alias behind) usually 
>> has.
>
> Given that there's a dispute about whether or not the city of 
> Jerusalem is in the country of Israel, I think it would be sensible to 
> avoid using Jerusalem as the representative city for Israel's timezone.
>
> Given that there is already an Asia/Tel_Aviv zone, with identical data 
> to the Asia/Jerusalem zone (implemented via a "Link" directive in the 
> input data), and that there is no dispute about whether or not Tel 
> Aviv is in Israel, and that Tel Aviv is the largest city in the 
> undisputed part of Israel, I think it would be reasonable to use Tel 
> Aviv as the representative city for Israel's timezone.
>
> Accordingly, I suggest:
>
> * Reverse the direction of the link, making Asia/Tel_Aviv the
>   primary name and making Asia/Jerusalem a link to it.
>
> * Use Asia/Tel_Aviv instead of Asia/Jerusalem in zone.tab.
>
> --apb (Alan Barrett)
>


--