[tz] Wrong spelling of a city in a timezone name
David Patte
dpatte at relativedata.com
Wed Oct 10 02:49:59 UTC 2018
Numbers are not political. Using the name of a place in the languuage of
a place is slightly more political. using an American derived name for a
place that is not in the USA is definitely political. America/Montreal
is totally insulting after two American invasions.
On 2018-10-09 22:27, Tim Parenti wrote:
> This may not be based in anything more than my understanding from
> having seen these discussions play out time and time again over the
> years… but I do think there's something more worth stating, if only
> for the mailing list archives:
>
> It seems our general "consensus" sentiment toward these sorts of
> requests is that they're an extension of tz's goal to be descriptive,
> not prescriptive. This at least matches the similar discussion at
> CLDR: https://unicode.org/cldr/trac/ticket/10185#comment:2
>
> Yes, our choice of English is arbitrary, but it is historical and
> there is a large (although certainly not insurmountable) amount of
> inertia behind it. Since it is regarded as a /lingua franca/, there
> are a wide body of sources with wide-ranging opinions on matters of
> geopolitics, which tz can leverage in helping decide how to record
> things. We, then, aim only to record rough consensus, much like other
> international standards organizations do, and attempt to leave the
> politics themselves to the politicians.
>
> Of course, even this can be regarded as a political stance, and in
> some sense, it is. And there are those who will still interpret that
> as /the maintainers/ taking a side on any given geopolitical issue…
> but that can't really be helped. In cases of conflict, even the most
> meticulously-crafted "neutral" deferential position will naturally
> reflect the biases of some group of "others" — in our case, the biases
> of the news organizations and other entities to whom we defer in
> choosing to source our data. As long as we are upfront about that (and
> I think, for the most part, we are), then we are meeting the broader
> stated goal of being "useful even if not 100% accurate".
>
> And so, we do what we can to be diplomatic when the inevitable
> arises. (Which can, as Paul points out, include filtering duplication
> to ensure quality of discussion.) But if the necessity of that
> diplomacy grates on anyone, in either direction, then perhaps this
> isn't the list for them. ;)
>
> --
> Tim Parenti
>
>
> On Tue, 9 Oct 2018 at 16:08, <Paul.Koning at dell.com
> <mailto:Paul.Koning at dell.com>> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Oct 9, 2018, at 3:15 PM, Michael Douglass
> <mikeadouglass at gmail.com <mailto:mikeadouglass at gmail.com>> wrote:
> >
> > So soon after the last one.
> >
> > Is it still too soon to suggest opaque ids again?
>
> Yes.
>
> paul
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/tz/attachments/20181009/4b865fb6/attachment.html>
More information about the tz
mailing list