Re: [LEAPSECS] interoperability

From: John Cowan <cowan_at_CCIL.ORG>
Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 02:31:04 -0500

Poul-Henning Kamp scripsit:

> Windows have got it right now I belive, but it used to be that a
> file created and transmitted from Denmark at the end of the business
> day would be older than a file created at the start of business day
> in California, despite a strict ordering of the events.

It's still true in the sense that the hardware clock is assumed to run
in LCT on Windows, and therefore discovering UTC depends on a correctly
set TZ variable. It's false in the sense that Windows now supports TZ

> Sure, and you can timestamp then on either timescale, because there
> is a 1 to 1 translation between the two timescales [1].

I think it's confusing to call it "1 to 1", except in the sense that
LCT seconds are the same length as UTC/TAI seconds. There are many
LCT timestamps that correspond to more than one UTC timestamp.
This can be kludged around by adding a bit (the isdst field in a struct time)
to say whether a LCT timestamp is the first or the second instance.

> The scheme you propose is eminently workable, and more or less exactly
> what we advocate. I'm happy that you now see the merits of it.

Nope, he still doesn't.

On the Semantic Web, it's too hard to prove     John Cowan
you're not a dog.  --Bill de hOra     
Received on Sun Jan 08 2006 - 23:31:20 PST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Sat Sep 04 2010 - 09:44:55 PDT