[tz] [PROPOSED] Remove many invented abbreviations in 'asia'

Michael Deckers michael.h.deckers at googlemail.com
Wed Jan 18 09:04:40 UTC 2017

    On 2017-01-17 00:06, Paul Eggert wrote:

> JST wasn't removed everywhere, only in areas that typically use numeric
> abbreviations. The idea was to use JST in occupied regions like Asia/Hong_Kong
> that have alphabetic traditions like HKT, and to use +09 in occupied regions
> like Asia/Yangon which lack such traditions. That way, historical tables in
> these areas will tend to use a consistent style, which is a plus.

    One could also argue that the choice of the same abbreviation for all
    occupied regions provides additional information. But I agree that the
    ice is thin here and that it is also a matter of style.

> Some of the previous tables' JST transitions were dubious anyway. Was it really
> called "Japan Standard Time" in Jakarta on September 22, 1945? And why wasn't
> "JST" used for Asia/Jayapura during 1942-1944 when Jayapura was at +09 and was
> under Japanese Imperial control? It was too much trouble to decide when to use
> JST vs +09, and it was a relief to remove this questionable political trivia
> when possible.

    Well, it certainly was called the same as in Japan by the
    Japanese, and they determined the time scale. And the proleptic
    use of acronyms for time scales also is a deviation from the
    guideline of recording only the most popular English use at
    the time.

    For a while I thought that the abbreviations of tzdb could
    converge to some CLDR format in the English locale but this
    may not even be a useful long term goal.

    Anyway, I fully agree with your quest to take systematic decisions
    in such cases. And many thanks for the enormous work and the TLC
    you are expending on tzdb!

    Michael Deckers.

This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.

More information about the tz mailing list