- tz - lists.iana.org

FW: Finnish summer time (DST) rule
by Olson, Arthur David (NIH/NCI) [E] May 15, 2006

May 15, 2006

Jukka A. Ukkonen is not on the time zone mailing list; direct replies appropriately. --ado -----Original Message----- From: Jukka A. Ukkonen [mailto:jau@iki.fi] Sent: Friday, May 12, 2006 1:57 AM To: tz(a)lecserver.nci.nih.gov Subject: Finnish summer time (DST) rule Greetings from Kirkkonummi (32km from Helsinki), The correct DST rule (in POSIX TZ syntax) for Finland has been at least since 2002 EET-02:00EEST-03:00,M3.5.0/03:00,M10.5.0/04:00 Notice that in there the zone change times are represented in the local time of the zone which is current at the moment when the change shall take place - i.e. both local times actually refer to 01:00 GMT. I guess Finland used this rule already several years before the common EU directive officially harmonized the DST rules all around EU from 2002 onwards. The EU directive can be found here... http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/pri/en/oj/dat/2001/l_031/l_03120010202en002 10022.pdf I will let you know, if I find more precise info about when Finland actually adopted the current DST rule. Cheers, // jau .--- ..- -.- -.- .- .- .-.-.- ..- -.- -.- --- -. . -. / Jukka A. Ukkonen, Oxit Ltd, Finland /__ M.Sc. (sw-eng & cs) (Phone) +358-500-606-671 / Internet: Jukka.Ukkonen(a)Oxit.Fi (Home) +358-9-6215-280 / Internet: jau(a)iki.fi v .--- .- ..- ...-.- .. -.- .. .-.-.- ..-. .. + + + + My opinions are mine and mine alone, not my employers. + + + +

2 1

Finnish summer time (DST) rule
by jau＠iki.fi May 11, 2006

May 11, 2006

Greetings from Kirkkonummi (32km from Helsinki), The correct DST rule (in POSIX TZ syntax) for Finland has been at least since 2002 EET-02:00EEST-03:00,M3.5.0/03:00,M10.5.0/04:00 Notice that in there the zone change times are represented in the local time of the zone which is current at the moment when the change shall take place - i.e. both local times actually refer to 01:00 GMT. I guess Finland used this rule already several years before the common EU directive officially harmonized the DST rules all around EU from 2002 onwards. The EU directive can be found here... http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/pri/en/oj/dat/2001/l_031/l_03120010202en002100… I will let you know, if I find more precise info about when Finland actually adopted the current DST rule. Cheers, // jau .--- ..- -.- -.- .- .- .-.-.- ..- -.- -.- --- -. . -. / Jukka A. Ukkonen, Oxit Ltd, Finland /__ M.Sc. (sw-eng & cs) (Phone) +358-500-606-671 / Internet: Jukka.Ukkonen(a)Oxit.Fi (Home) +358-9-6215-280 / Internet: jau(a)iki.fi v .--- .- ..- ...-.- .. -.- .. .-.-.- ..-. .. + + + + My opinions are mine and mine alone, not my employers. + + + +

1 0

Russia +4 breakout oblasts
by Jesper Norgaard Welen May 10, 2006

May 10, 2006

Oscar van Vlijmen made (as far as I understand) a thourough investigation of the Russian timezones in 2001-08-25 which documented all the oblasts that the russian timezones covers, listing the oblast's that correspond to each timezone. There are many english-speaking sites that to this day disagree with specific cities (stating that Kirov is on GMT+4 and similar), but after checking some russian sites I have come to the conclusion that the highly appreciated work of Oscar is still corresponding to current time in those places. However, all of the russian timezones in the tz database are declared as having been unaltered since 1991-1993 (this differs a bit from one russian timezone to the other), and especially the Europe/Samara timezone is unchanged since 1991 Oct 20 3:00. The following maps show the oblast' Kirovskaya, Saratovskaya, Volgogradskaya and Astrakhanskaya to be on GMT+4 as well: http://www.odci.gov/cia/publications/factbook/reference_maps/pdf/time_zones. pdf http://www.statoids.com/tru.html http://www.manifold.net/download/freemaps.html http://www.lib.utexas.edu/maps/world_maps/time_zone_world_98.jpg This is also true for a recent (1995+) ESRI map of timezones I have seen. The above links are all taken directly or indirectly from http://www.twinsun.com/tz/tz-link.htm Oscar is correct that since 2001 these were no longer on GMT+4 but had returned to GMT+3, but this return we have not documented with one or several timezones. I am not aware when these changes happened, but any guess would be better than the current state, where these four oblast' are on Moscow time since 1880, which is hardly likely to be true, if so many map makers have insisted on that they were on GMT+4 or even GMT+5. Regards, - Jesper Jesper Nørgaard Welen Email: jnorgard(a)Prodigy.Net.mx Project Leader (Líder de Proyecto) Software CIMMYT - Centro Internacional de Mejoramiento de Maíz y Trigo Dirección: CIMMYT Int. c/o Jesper Nørgaard Km. 45, Carretera México-Veracruz El Batán Texcoco, Edo. de México CP 56130 MEXICO Tel.: +52 (55) 58-04-20-04 ext. 1374 Fax: +52 (55) 58-04-75-58 Tel. Casa: 53-10-05-95 ó 53-10-97-78 Download the free program World Time Explorer, I made: http://www.worldtimeexplorer.com/index.html

3 3

Bermuda will adopt US rules next year
by Paul Eggert May 7, 2006

May 7, 2006

In today's Royal Gazette, Stuart Roberts reports that Bermuda will fall into line with the US daylight-saving rules next year; see <http://www.theroyalgazette.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060506/NEWS/105…>. Currently the tz tables take advantage of the fact that Bermuda and the Bahamas use the same DST rules, and have done so since 1974. My guess is that the Bahamas will fall into line as well, but I have no info about this, so perhaps it's better to play it safe for now and split these rules. There's no rush on this, since the new Bermuda rules don't affect time stamps until March 2007. Besides the Bahamas, other countries to watch on this front include Cuba, Haiti, Mexico, and Turks and Caicos.

1 0

DST in Honduras, El Salvador, Guatemala, Nicaragua
by Jesper Norgaard Welen May 6, 2006

May 6, 2006

There is a flood of mutually conflicting stories on the near past/future DST changes in Honduras, El Salvador, Guatemala and Nicaragua. Here is a small bouquet of articles to consider, not that I will pretend to judge which are true or false: Change of DST in Honduras: http://ar.news.yahoo.com/060503/4/qmx7.html expected for this Sunday 7 at 0:00 Change of DST perhaps postponed in El Salvador: http://www.laprensagrafica.com/lodeldia/883.asp ... it has the interesting claim that Honduras changed the same time as Guatemala and Nicaragua. Change of DST in Guatemala: http://www.deguate.com/cgi-bin/noticias/print.pl?article=7134 claims that the return of DST will happen the 30.th. of September at 24 hours, or really 1.st. of October at 0:00. Another confirmation that Nicaragua change was at 2:00 in the morning: http://www.elnuevodiario.com.ni/2006/05/01/nacionales/18410: Por orden del presidente de la República, Enrique Bolaños, Nicaragua adelantó en sesenta minutos su hora oficial, ayer a las dos de la mañana, y así permanecerá hasta el 30 de septiembre. This means the following (my informal translation) By order of the president of the republic, Enrique Bolaños, Nicaragua advanced by sixty minutes their official time, yesterday at 2 in the morning, and will stay that way until 30.th. of september. Jesper Nørgaard Welen Email: jnorgard(a)Prodigy.Net.mx Project Leader (Líder de Proyecto) Software CIMMYT - Centro Internacional de Mejoramiento de Maíz y Trigo Dirección: CIMMYT Int. c/o Jesper Nørgaard Km. 45, Carretera México-Veracruz El Batán Texcoco, Edo. de México CP 56130 MEXICO Tel.: +52 (55) 58-04-20-04 ext. 1374 Fax: +52 (55) 58-04-75-58 Tel. Casa: 53-10-05-95 ó 53-10-97-78 Download the free program World Time Explorer, I made: http://www.worldtimeexplorer.com/index.html

2 1

Honduras and El Salvador on DST too?
by Oscar van Vlijmen May 5, 2006

May 5, 2006

Reportedly (wordltimezone.com, some Spanish media) Honduras chose to follow Guatemala and will observe DST starting "la medianoche del sábado", so probably Saturday 06 May 2006, 24:00 local time. No ending date is mentioned other than "durante cuatro meses hasta septiembre" (during 4 months until September). My theory is: DST ends Saturday 02 September 2006 24:00 local time. El Salvador will follow Honduras. No serious details, no serious sources were given. I couldn't find any more reliable sources yet. Does anybody know more of this?

2 1

Tzcode2006f.tar.gz and tzdata2006f.tar.gz
by Olson, Arthur David (NIH/NCI) [E] May 1, 2006

May 1, 2006

The files... ftp://elsie.nci.nih.gov/pub/tzcode2006f.tar.gz ...and... ftp://elsie.nci.nih.gov/pub/tzdata2006f.tar.gz ...are now available; a missing version number problem is fixed (with thanks to Bradley White for catching the problem). --ado

1 0

Tzcode2006e.tar.gz and tzdata2006e.tar.gz
by Olson, Arthur David (NIH/NCI) [E] May 1, 2006

May 1, 2006

The files... ftp://elsie.nci.nih.gov/pub/tzcode2006e.tar.gz ...and... ftp://elsie.nci.nih.gov/pub/tzdata2006e.tar.gz ...are now available. These reflect the changes circulated on the time zone mailing list last week by Paul Eggert; I've also added new items to tz-arts.htm that were found by Paul. --ado

1 0

RE: Some modifications of China related timezone info.
by Paul Schauble April 30, 2006

April 30, 2006

I agree with the drawbacks of using the most populated city as a proxy for a time zone. In this case, what's wrong with calling the tz zone Asia/China and being done with it? ++PLS -----Original Message----- From: tz-request(a)elsie.nci.nih.gov [mailto:tz-request@elsie.nci.nih.gov] On Behalf Of Zhe Su Sent: Saturday, April 29, 2006 7:06 AM To: Paul Eggert Cc: tz(a)lecserver.nci.nih.gov Subject: Re: Some modifications of China related timezone info. Hi, And in my opinion, using the rule of using most populous location to identify each region is not a generic way for every countries. IMO, we should use different rules for different countries to fit their local circumstances. For China (or more exactly, PRC), it's apparently not suitable to use the population rule. Because the most populous location in China is Chongqing, which is belong to Sichuan province, the most populous province of China. But Chongqing is far less developed than Shanghai and Beijing, so it's far less popular than Beijing and Shanghai. So for China, I'd prefer to use the most important and popular location, Beijing, the capital of China to identify our unique timezone. Regards James Su On 4/29/06, Zhe Su <james.su(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > I still can't agree with you. It's harmless to add "Asia/Beijing". > And China now uses only one timezone, which is called officially > "China Standard Time" and indeed it's known as Beijing Time. > Now we have five timezones for China in asia/zone.tab: > "Asia/Shanghai", "Asia/Chongqing", "Asia/Urumqi", "Asia/Harbin", > "Asia/Kashgar". But they are known as historic timezones (according to > comments in asia file). After 1949, the establishing of People's > Republic of China, we uses only one timezone, which is called "Beijing > Time" or "China Standard Time" officially. > So if you think we should choose a most populous city of China to > represent the only one "China Standard Time", that is Chongqing rather > than Shanghai, because Chongqing has more than 27 million population. > But, I still think using "Asia/Beijing" to represent the only timezone > used in Peoples Republic of China is the most reasonable way. > > Regards > James Su > > On 4/29/06, Paul Eggert <eggert(a)cs.ucla.edu> wrote: > > "Zhe Su" <james.su(a)gmail.com> writes: > > > > > So, is it ok to just add "Asia/Beijing" into the database along with > > > "Asia/Shanghai"? So that people can choose whatever they want. > > > > For now I'd rather not do that, for the reasons already mentioned. > > >

2 1

Re: Some modifications of China related timezone info.
by Paul Eggert April 29, 2006

April 29, 2006

Ken Pizzini <tz.(a)explicate.org> writes: > the populations do seem to have converged significantly over the 15 > or so years since the Asia/Shanghai entry was created, and the trend > lines strongly suggest that if Beijing has not yet overtaken > Shanghai as the largest city in China, it is very likely to do so > soon. That depends on whose estimates one uses, and what one means by "soon". If we take estimates recently published by Chinese news agencies for the end of 2005, for example, Shanghai had 17.78 million people with a 2.030% annual growth rate since 2000 <http://english.sina.com/china/1/2006/0406/72038.html>, whereas Beijing had 15.36 million people with a 2.135% annual growth rate in the same period <http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2006-04/20/content_4451085.htm>, so at current rates it will take about 142 years for Beijing's population to surpass Shanghai, at which point both cities will have populations of about 309 million people. To put it mildly, I don't have a lot of faith in these estimates, but until this thing settles out with a clear winner there's no rush. There is an advantage of keeping the Zone names stable, which our other correspondents have reminded us of periodically. I'd rather not get into the business of discussing zone names changes based on guesswork forecasts of population growth. (It's hard enough just keeping track of the clocks. :-)

2 4

Re: Wisconsin's variation of CDT
by Larry M. Smith April 28, 2006

April 28, 2006

Paul Eggert wrote: > Robert Elz <kre(a)munnari.oz.au> writes: > >> Do you really believe that almost anyone (members of this list >> perhaps >> excepted) actually changes their clock at the precise instant that >> DST (or summer time, or whatever it gets called in different areas) >> actually changes. > > Yes, I do. Many people in this country no longer use watches; they > use cell phones to tell time. And cell phones did change at 02:00 in > Wisconsin on April 2; see > <http://www.wisbusiness.com/index.iml?Article=58272>. > <quote> At 2 a.m. on April 2, most of the United States turns clocks ahead one hour as Daylight Saving Time begins. The clock function on wireless phones is controlled by information in the signal from the network on which the phone is located. U.S. Cellular uses Global Positioning Satellite (GPS) technology to set the time on its network, transferring that information to customer handsets. At 2 a.m., the network adjusts the wireless handsetÆs clock for Daylight Saving Time automatically, making each phone an accurate reflection of the current local time. </quote> This argument is starting to recurse into itself; 1) If people in the state of Wisconsin tell time based on electronic equipment. 2) That equipment is keyed off of dataset that is incorrect for them. 3) That dataset should stay the way it is because this is how the people of Wisconsin tell time. Isn't this a circular argument? Please don't get me wrong... I am just publishing my finding, and I expect that before March of 2007 this will all be a moot point. When Wisconsin changes its law (as its dates will be wrong) I expect it will remove date and time and refer back to the U.S. law. So I expect these finding to be of historical nature by the time anyone outside of this list sees them. > I myself prefer an old-fashioned pocket watch, but I've observed that > my students, whose ages are typically around 20, use cell phones or > laptops to tell time just as often as they use watches -- perhaps even > more so. Sales of cheap watches reportedly declined 10% last year in > the US, most likely due to the popularity of telling time by cell > phone; see > <http://www.news-journalonline.com/NewsJournalOnline/News/Headlines/frtHEAD0…>. <quote> "Nowadays with all the electronic goods such as cell phones, iPods, the younger generation is more techno-savvy and they're relying upon electronics that they have and not wearing the watches." </quote> Again, using data based on tzdata. > > I imagine that people who have to log times (nurses, doctors, police > officers, and fire departments, for example) make sure their clocks > are close to the consensus time. These days no doubt a lot of this is > automated (mostly by our work, by Microsoft's, and by the cell phone > companies') but that still counts. > Again, based on tzdata. > I did consult some sources in Wisconsin for what people actually do, > and they agreed that 02:00 was the time people switched. See, for > example, > > Bob Petrie, Locals prepare to lose sleep, gain daylight, Sheboygan > Press (2006-04-01) > <http://www.htrnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060401/SHE0101/60 > 4010508/1062> <quote> At 2 a.m. Sunday, Wisconsin makes the switch, which pushes sunset 60 minutes later into the evening. Sunday's sunset will be at 7:20 p.m. </quote> It can be argued that this reporter hadn't checked his facts. > > >> More likely to be relevant would be what time the radio stations >> announce during the "different" hour > > I'd be surprised if radio-station time announcements in Wisconsin > differed materially from the federal daylight-saving rules. > I have a number of phone calls out to different radio stations in regards to this, but it would not surprise me to find that they are using some device to track time and that it is linked back to using tzdata.

1 0

RE: Some modifications of China related timezone info.
by Andy Lipscomb April 28, 2006

April 28, 2006

One other issue that may or may not be worth considering. Beijing mean time was, prior to the introduction of time zones, the standard for determining midnight in the computation of the Chinese calendar. Thus, having an entry with Beijing's mean time and transition point may be a help to programmers seeking to implement that calendar.

1 0

Re: Some modifications of China related timezone info.
by Zhe Su April 27, 2006

April 27, 2006

Hi, So counting both kind of population, as Beijing and Shanghai have almost same amount of population (though Shanghai has slightly more population right now), and as Beijing is capital of China. I just suggest to add Asia/Beijing into timezone database along with Asia/Shanghai. Just like what was done in my proposed patch. Regards James Su On 4/28/06, Ken Pizzini <tz.(a)explicate.org> wrote: > On Fri, Apr 28, 2006 at 03:52:53PM +0800, Zhe Su wrote: > > I don't think we should count floating population, because those > > part of population is "floating", many of them will move around > > frequently. > > While _individuals_ in this category may come and go, in the aggregate > the "floating" population in these areas has been consistently and > continually growing. They are a real population. > The statistics I've seen (at least the ones that were of good > quality) only reported the *officially registered* portion of these > populations, so clearly the actual population of each urban > agglomeration is actually higher than typically reported, but I'm not > sure how this might affect the relative populations of Beijing and > Shanghai. > > > And the data source that you mentioned is apparently wrong. > > It's not that simple. The data sources I've been able to track down > are all over the map as to the absolute number associated with each > city. Part of this is just that they are reporting based on different > criteria: is the registered transient population included? > Is the unregistered transient population estimated? Is the census > just of the city proper, or does it include the entirety of the "urban > agglomeration"? How recently did the enumeration take place? > And what methodology was used to collect the information (official > census vs. statistical sampling, for example)? > > Except for the fact that it is five years out of date in a region of > very high demographic flux, the document that I would have trusted > most is the Fifth National Census (done in 2000-2001), which still > rated Shanghai more populous by a significant amount. > But clearly that isn't sufficient, so let's compare the value that you > quoted from a Dec. 2005 page on www.bj.xinhuanet.com with a page I > found from Jan. 2005 (in English): > > http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/english/doc/2005-01/10/content_407463.htm > If the two sets of values are presumed to both be correct, then that > means that Beijing's population grew by an astounding 10% over the > course of the year! (Almost all from immigration, since you also > quoted the 0.07% "natural" growth rate.) Surely there must be a > disagreement between how the National Population and Family Commission > of China (quoted by xinhuanet) and the Beijing Municipal Public > Security Bureau (quoted by chinadaily) do their counting. > This is the very kind of discrepancy that makes determining "the" > truth very challenging. > > > > So I suggest the following: the populations do seem to have converged > significantly over the 15 or so years since the Asia/Shanghai entry > was created, and the trend lines strongly suggest that if Beijing has > not yet overtaken Shanghai as the largest city in China, it is very > likely to do so soon. So I say that Asia/Beijing and Asia/Shanghai > should just be preemptively linked: we're talking concentrations of > over 15 million souls in each case anyway, which is surely significant > enough to be worth at least as much as the Africa/Timbuktu link? (As > to which is listed as primary and which as the link, I really don't > care. Toss a coin.) > > --Ken Pizzini >

1 0

Re: Some modifications of China related timezone info.
by Ken Pizzini April 27, 2006

April 27, 2006

On Fri, Apr 28, 2006 at 03:52:53PM +0800, Zhe Su wrote: > I don't think we should count floating population, because those > part of population is "floating", many of them will move around > frequently. While _individuals_ in this category may come and go, in the aggregate the "floating" population in these areas has been consistently and continually growing. They are a real population. The statistics I've seen (at least the ones that were of good quality) only reported the *officially registered* portion of these populations, so clearly the actual population of each urban agglomeration is actually higher than typically reported, but I'm not sure how this might affect the relative populations of Beijing and Shanghai. > And the data source that you mentioned is apparently wrong. It's not that simple. The data sources I've been able to track down are all over the map as to the absolute number associated with each city. Part of this is just that they are reporting based on different criteria: is the registered transient population included? Is the unregistered transient population estimated? Is the census just of the city proper, or does it include the entirety of the "urban agglomeration"? How recently did the enumeration take place? And what methodology was used to collect the information (official census vs. statistical sampling, for example)? Except for the fact that it is five years out of date in a region of very high demographic flux, the document that I would have trusted most is the Fifth National Census (done in 2000-2001), which still rated Shanghai more populous by a significant amount. But clearly that isn't sufficient, so let's compare the value that you quoted from a Dec. 2005 page on www.bj.xinhuanet.com with a page I found from Jan. 2005 (in English): http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/english/doc/2005-01/10/content_407463.htm If the two sets of values are presumed to both be correct, then that means that Beijing's population grew by an astounding 10% over the course of the year! (Almost all from immigration, since you also quoted the 0.07% "natural" growth rate.) Surely there must be a disagreement between how the National Population and Family Commission of China (quoted by xinhuanet) and the Beijing Municipal Public Security Bureau (quoted by chinadaily) do their counting. This is the very kind of discrepancy that makes determining "the" truth very challenging. So I suggest the following: the populations do seem to have converged significantly over the 15 or so years since the Asia/Shanghai entry was created, and the trend lines strongly suggest that if Beijing has not yet overtaken Shanghai as the largest city in China, it is very likely to do so soon. So I say that Asia/Beijing and Asia/Shanghai should just be preemptively linked: we're talking concentrations of over 15 million souls in each case anyway, which is surely significant enough to be worth at least as much as the Africa/Timbuktu link? (As to which is listed as primary and which as the link, I really don't care. Toss a coin.) --Ken Pizzini

1 0

Re: Some modifications of China related timezone info.
by Zhe Su April 27, 2006

April 27, 2006

Hi, I don't think we should count floating population, because those part of population is "floating", many of them will move around frequently. And the data source that you mentioned is apparently wrong. Regards James Su On 4/28/06, Paul Eggert <eggert(a)cs.ucla.edu> wrote: > Robert Elz <kre(a)munnari.oz.au> writes: > > > Having a simple rule that always gets followed allows us to ignore > > endless arguments > > Yes, that's one of the principal motivations. > > > Of course, if it is a close thing, and it is possible that Shanghai > > may overtake Beijing again next year (or something) then keeping > > switching backwards and forwards would be irrational > > Yes, in the past when this has happened, we've tried to avoid change > for the sake of tracking the current ephemeral champion. Of course > this has to be done within reason; if the new champion is undisputed > then it would be time to change. > > But as far as Beijing vs Shanghai goes, it seems that the current > headcount leader is still Shanghai, if we include the floating > population and use the statistics James Su mentioned. > > Also, if we count the entire metropolitan-area population, the > statistics I've seen suggest that Beijing still trails well behind > Shanghai. See <http://www.citypopulation.de/World.html>, for example, > which gives 12.1 million for Beijing and 18.2 million for Shanghai. > Or > <http://www.world-gazetteer.com/wg.php?men=gcis&dat=32&geo=-54&srt=pna > n&col=aohdq&pt=a&srt=pnan>, which gives 11.5 million for Beijing and > 14.9 million for Shanghai. >

1 0

Re: Some modifications of China related timezone info.
by Paul Eggert April 27, 2006

April 27, 2006

Robert Elz <kre(a)munnari.oz.au> writes: > Having a simple rule that always gets followed allows us to ignore > endless arguments Yes, that's one of the principal motivations. > Of course, if it is a close thing, and it is possible that Shanghai > may overtake Beijing again next year (or something) then keeping > switching backwards and forwards would be irrational Yes, in the past when this has happened, we've tried to avoid change for the sake of tracking the current ephemeral champion. Of course this has to be done within reason; if the new champion is undisputed then it would be time to change. But as far as Beijing vs Shanghai goes, it seems that the current headcount leader is still Shanghai, if we include the floating population and use the statistics James Su mentioned. Also, if we count the entire metropolitan-area population, the statistics I've seen suggest that Beijing still trails well behind Shanghai. See <http://www.citypopulation.de/World.html>, for example, which gives 12.1 million for Beijing and 18.2 million for Shanghai. Or <http://www.world-gazetteer.com/wg.php?men=gcis&dat=32&geo=-54&srt=pnan&col=…>, which gives 11.5 million for Beijing and 14.9 million for Shanghai.

1 0

Saskatchewan (2007)
by Chris Walton April 27, 2006

April 27, 2006

Over the past couple of months I have posted a number of e-mails related to Canadian time legislation. I never mentioned Saskatchewan because most of the province does not observe daylight saving time. There are actually two small regions in Saskatchewan that do use daylight saving time: 1)Lloydminster and surrounding area. 2)Creighton and Denare Beach area. Both of these regions are briefly mentioned in TZDATA's "northamerica" file. ################# The city of Lloydminster straddles the Alberta/Saskatchewan border. It uses MST/MDT. There is a special bit of legislation called the "Lloydminster Charter". The bylaws in the charter cover the entire city (both sides of the provincial border). Here are two URLs for the charter. Government of Alberta web site: http://www.qp.gov.ab.ca/Documents/REGS/1979_043.CFM Government of Saskatchewan web site: http://www.qp.gov.sk.ca/documents/english/Statutes/Historical/lloydchr.pdf Section 5(2) reads: ------------------------------------------------------------------ "Whenever any particular time of day is referred to in this Charter, the same shall mean Mountain Standard Time except that in every year during the period between two o'clock in the forenoon of the first Sunday in April and two o'clock in the forenoon of the last Sunday in October it shall mean Central Standard Time." ----------------------------------------------------------------- Since Lloydminster has traditionally followed the daylight savings practices of Alberta, I assume that the charter will have to be updated for 2007. ################# The Battle River region surrounding the city of Lloydminster uses the same time as Lloydminster. Presumably the bylaws in the Lloydminster Charter don't apply outside the city limits. So the region surrounding Lloydminster on the east side of the provincial border is subject to the rules in the Saskatchewan Time Act. The Saskatchewan Time Act defines time for all regions of the province except the city of Lloydminster. The Act allows the rules in western parts of the province to be overridden by public election. http://www.qp.gov.sk.ca/documents/english/statutes/statutes/t14.pdf Several sections of the act are of interest: ---------------------------------------------------------------- 2(i) "summer period means that period in each year beginning at two o'clock, mountain standard time, in the forenoon of the first Sunday in April and ending at two o'clock, mountain standard time, in the forenoon of the last Sunday in October;" --------------------------------------------------------------- "Non-application of Act 5 Nothing in this Act applies to a reference to time in: (a) The Lloydminster Charter; or"... --------------------------------------------------------------- "Time in certain areas of western Saskatchewan 8(1) The time to be used and observed in western Saskatchewan: (a) during the summer period, is central standard time; and (b) during the winter period, is mountain standard time, except in respect of any time option area where central standard time is decided upon by a majority of the electors of the time option area voting with respect thereto under this Act whose ballots are not rejected. (2) Notwithstanding subsection (1), on and from the commencement of the winter period in 1983 and until a vote is taken in accordance with this Act, the time to be used and observed: (a) in the Battle River Time Option Area: (i) during the summer period, is central standard time; and (ii) during the winter period, is mountain standard time; and (b) throughout the year in the Paynton Time Option Area is central standard time." --------------------------------------------------------------------- Notice that the transition from daylight time to standard time is supposed to take place at 2:00am MST (3:00MDT). This is one hour after the transition defined in the Lloydminster charter. Therefore, the area surrounding Lloydminster on the east side of the provincial border should be out of sync with Lloydminster for one hour each year. Ugh! Doesn't this call for a new time zone for a region that probably has no more than 2 or 3 thousand residents. Maybe we just have to ignore the Time Act. The NRC seems to have ignored it. The INMS-NRC site says: "Areas around Lloydminster are in the Mountain Time zone and change at 2:00a.m. local time as in Alberta" http://inms-ienm.nrc-cnrc.gc.ca/en/faq_time_e.php#5 ################ And finally there is the small area that contains the towns of Creighton and Denare Beach. This region uses CST/CDT to align with the city of Flin Flon Manitoba. The use of daylight saving time in this region is in defiance of the Saskatchewan Time Act. Should we stop and ponder what time Creighton and Denare Beach have historically done the transition from daylight time to standard time? Is it: a) 2:00am wall time as is tradition in most parts of the country or b) 02:00 CST (3:00am wall time) as per the old Manitoba Time Act or c) 02:00 MST (4:00am wall time) as per the definition of "summer time" in the Saskatchewan Time Act? or d) 8:07am wall time because we can't expect non-law-abiding citizens get up in the middle of the night to change the clocks. It will be interesting to see if the Saskatchewan government bothers to update the Time Act to reflect the extra four weeks of daylight savings in 2007. Personally I think that the all fourteen pages of the old act should be burned and replaced with something more concise. But that is just my opinion. I will keep an eye out for new legislation and I will post an e-mail to this group if I see anything. -chris

1 0

Re: Wisconsin's variation of CDT
by Paul Eggert April 27, 2006

April 27, 2006

Robert Elz <kre(a)munnari.oz.au> writes: > Do you really believe that almost anyone (members of this list perhaps > excepted) actually changes their clock at the precise instant that DST > (or summer time, or whatever it gets called in different areas) > actually changes. Yes, I do. Many people in this country no longer use watches; they use cell phones to tell time. And cell phones did change at 02:00 in Wisconsin on April 2; see <http://www.wisbusiness.com/index.iml?Article=58272>. I myself prefer an old-fashioned pocket watch, but I've observed that my students, whose ages are typically around 20, use cell phones or laptops to tell time just as often as they use watches -- perhaps even more so. Sales of cheap watches reportedly declined 10% last year in the US, most likely due to the popularity of telling time by cell phone; see <http://www.news-journalonline.com/NewsJournalOnline/News/Headlines/frtHEAD0…>. I imagine that people who have to log times (nurses, doctors, police officers, and fire departments, for example) make sure their clocks are close to the consensus time. These days no doubt a lot of this is automated (mostly by our work, by Microsoft's, and by the cell phone companies') but that still counts. I did consult some sources in Wisconsin for what people actually do, and they agreed that 02:00 was the time people switched. See, for example, Bob Petrie, Locals prepare to lose sleep, gain daylight, Sheboygan Press (2006-04-01) <http://www.htrnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060401/SHE0101/60401050…> > More likely to be relevant would be what time the radio stations > announce during the "different" hour I'd be surprised if radio-station time announcements in Wisconsin differed materially from the federal daylight-saving rules.

1 0

Re: Some modifications of China related timezone info.
by Zhe Su April 27, 2006

April 27, 2006

Hi, As I mentioned, according to the data of 2005, the resident population of Beijing is about 13.8 million, Shanghai is about 13.4 million. The natural growth rate of Beijing resident population is about 0.1% (2005 is 0.07%), (data from http://www.bj.xinhuanet.com/bjpd_sdzx/2005-12/06/content_5751145.htm) While, the natural growth rate of Shanghai resident population is -0.03% (2005) and has been kept nagative for 8 years. (data from http://www.happyhome.net.cn/read.asp?subjectid=212&infoid=1452&forumid=14117) Though, the growth rate of floating population of both cities are very high. More and more people come to Beijing and Shanghai from other provinces for work. Regards James Su On 4/28/06, Robert Elz <kre(a)munnari.oz.au> wrote: > Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2006 13:02:16 +0800 > From: "Zhe Su" <james.su(a)gmail.com> > Message-ID: > <278a3d0604272202t58aa5802nf0b11c63bfe110bb(a)mail.gmail.com> > > | Following this rule, "Asia/Beijing" should be used instead of > | "Asia/Shanghai", because more people prefer "Asia/Beijing" in China, > | as Beijing has more people than Shanghai :-) > > If the population of Beijing is greater than that of Shanghai then > you're right, the zone name should be changed (with the old one left > as an alias for a while for people who are used to it). It would > not be the first time that names have changed for this reason (when > relative populations of different cities alters). > > Of course, if it is a close thing, and it is possible that Shanghai > may overtake Beijing again next year (or something) then keeping > switching backwards and forwards would be irrational - so just keeping > things stable should be better, but if (which I would certainly > imagine is possible) that Beijing is simply growing faster than > Shanghai and has now grown bigger, the zone name can change. > > kre >

1 0

Re: Some modifications of China related timezone info.
by Robert Elz April 27, 2006

April 27, 2006

Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2006 13:02:16 +0800 From: "Zhe Su" <james.su(a)gmail.com> Message-ID: <278a3d0604272202t58aa5802nf0b11c63bfe110bb(a)mail.gmail.com> | Following this rule, "Asia/Beijing" should be used instead of | "Asia/Shanghai", because more people prefer "Asia/Beijing" in China, | as Beijing has more people than Shanghai :-) If the population of Beijing is greater than that of Shanghai then you're right, the zone name should be changed (with the old one left as an alias for a while for people who are used to it). It would not be the first time that names have changed for this reason (when relative populations of different cities alters). Of course, if it is a close thing, and it is possible that Shanghai may overtake Beijing again next year (or something) then keeping switching backwards and forwards would be irrational - so just keeping things stable should be better, but if (which I would certainly imagine is possible) that Beijing is simply growing faster than Shanghai and has now grown bigger, the zone name can change. kre

1 0

Re: Some modifications of China related timezone info.
by Zhe Su April 27, 2006

April 27, 2006

Hi, That's not true. According the data from "National Population and Family Commission of China", last year, Shanghai has 13.4 million resident population, while Beijing has 13.8 million resident population. At the same time, Shanghai has about 5.8 floating population, Beijing has about 3 million floating population. So, Beijing has more resident population than Shanghai, though the total population is less. The data from: Shanghai: http://www.chinapop.gov.cn/rkxx/rkxw/t20060406_58076.htm Beijing: http://www.gjjsw.gov.cn/rkzh/zgrk/tjgb/t20040326_2833.htm (Sorry, they are in Chinese) Both for 2005 year. Regards James Su On 4/28/06, David Keegel <djk(a)cybersource.com.au> wrote: > My research on google suggests Beijing is about 15 million population, > and Shanghai is about 18-20 million. > > On Fri, Apr 28, 2006 at 01:02:16PM +0800, Zhe Su wrote: > > Hi, > > Following this rule, "Asia/Beijing" should be used instead of > > "Asia/Shanghai", because more people prefer "Asia/Beijing" in China, > > as Beijing has more people than Shanghai :-) > > > > Regards > > James Su > > -- > ______________________________________________________________________ > _____ David Keegel <djk(a)cybersource.com.au> > http://www.cyber.com.au/users/djk/ > Cybersource P/L: Linux/Unix Systems Administration > Consulting/Contracting >

1 0

Re: Some modifications of China related timezone info.
by Zhe Su April 27, 2006

April 27, 2006

Hi, Following this rule, "Asia/Beijing" should be used instead of "Asia/Shanghai", because more people prefer "Asia/Beijing" in China, as Beijing has more people than Shanghai :-) Regards James Su On 4/28/06, Robert Elz <kre(a)munnari.oz.au> wrote: > Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 22:54:12 -0400 > From: John Hawkinson <jhawk(a)MIT.EDU> > Message-ID: <20060428025412.GN677(a)multics.mit.edu> > > | I can't say I see quite why it is such a bad thing to make exceptions > | in the uniform policy where they are clearly understandable and > | preferred by most people... I'm skeptical of claims of > | non-scalability. > > The scalability that matters isn't what the zoneinfo files can handle, > but what this mailing list can handle. > > Having a simple rule that always gets followed allows us to ignore > endless arguments about what is, or is not, "preferred by most > people", and how anyone could ever really tell (when that argument is > made, 99% of the time, it means "I prefer".) > > Of course, we still periodically get this discussion - but at least > there's just one of this one, and not the many "this name is better than that name" > for any arbitrary name. > > kre >

1 0

FW: FW: Timezone file asia
by Olson, Arthur David (NIH/NCI) [E] April 27, 2006

April 27, 2006

K. Sethu is not on the time zone mailing list; direct replies appropriately. --ado ________________________________ From: K Sethu [mailto:skhome@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 26, 2006 12:17 AM To: tz(a)lecserver.nci.nih.gov Subject: Fwd: FW: Timezone file asia On request of Paul Eggert <eggert(a)cs.ucla.edu> I am forwarding to tz(a)elsie.nci.nih.gov herewith my email to Paul Eggert and Nimal Ratnayake. Furhter Nimal's first message, Paul's response to it and Paul's response to my following message are also copied in that order for reference below the following forwarded message K. Sethu ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: K Sethu <skhome(a)gmail.com> Date: Apr 25, 2006 11:12 AM Subject: Re: FW: Timezone file asia To: Paul Eggert < eggert(a)cs.ucla.edu> Cc: Nimal Ratnayake <nimalr(a)pdn.ac.lk> On 4/25/06, Paul Eggert < eggert(a)cs.ucla.edu <mailto:eggert@cs.ucla.edu> > wrote: > Nimal Ratnayake <nimalr(a)pdn.ac.lk> writes: > > > Actually although the time offset is the same as IST, we call it Sri > > Lanka Time. > > I am tryinng to get some authoritative info from organizations like > > the Meteorological > > Department, Sri Lanka Standards Institute or ICT Agency of the government. > > Thanks. I'm also interested as to when this name came into common use. > > (Presumably it was not called "Sri Lanka Time" back in 1920. :-) > I think the abbreviation LKT originated from the world of computers at the time of or subsequent to the time zone changes by SL Government twice in 1996 and probably SL Government or its standardization /ict agencies never decalred an abbreviation as national standard. I recollect before the recent change the government annoucemments mentioning it as simply changing Sri Lanka Standard Time or Sri Lanka Time and no mention was made about the abbreviation. If we look at Sri Lanka Department of Government's "Official News Website of Sri Lanka" - for current page at http://www.news.lk/ we can see that they use SLT as abbreviation in time stamp at the beginning of each news item - for example: Tuesday 25-04-2006 SLT 09:30 (+05:30 GMT). For an example before the recent change, look at: http://www.news.lk/news_2006_04_072.htm - this has the news item on cabinet decision for changing of time and the time stamp then was Friday 07-04-2006 SLT 06:30 (+06:00 GMT). So question arises whether SLT was at any time adopted as standard abbreviation by the government. Within Sri Lanka I think LKT is well known among computer users and adminsitrators. In my opinion SLT may not be a good choice because the nation's largest telcom / internet operator Sri Lanka Telcom is well known by that abbreviation - simply as SLT (there IP domains are slt.lk and sltnet.lk ). But if indeed our government has adopted SLT as standard abbreviation (that we have not known so far) then it is better that it be used for all computers. Hope Nimal gets more authoratative information in his investigations ~Sethu ------------------------------------------------------------------------ - Previous messages> From: Nimal Ratnayake <nimalr(a)pdn.ac.lk > Mailed-By: pdn.ac.lk To: Paul Eggert <eggert(a)cs.ucla.edu> Cc: K Sethu <skhome(a)gmail.com > Date: Apr 24, 2006 9:44 PM Subject: Re: FW: Timezone file asia Hi, >It was "IST" from 1906 (when Colombo switched from Moratuwa Mean Time >to India time) through 1996 (when Colombo switched away from India >time), so I thought, it more consistent to revert back to the old >abbreviation. > >But perhaps this isn't correct. What do English-speaking people >typically say when they want to talk about the time zone used in >Colombo nowadays? If they say "Sri Lanka time" then LKT would be more >appropriate. > >One possibility is that we wait for a bit for the dust to settle down >and then see what people actually say in practice. > > > Actually although the time offset is the same as IST, we call it Sri Lanka Time. I am tryinng to get some authoritative info from organizations like the Meteorological Department, Sri Lanka Standards Institute or ICT Agency of the government. >While we're on the subject of Sri Lanka time, Peter Apps and Ranga >Sirilal reported on April 12 that the Tamil Tigers "never accepted the >original 1996 time change and simply kept their clocks set five and a >half hours ahead of Greenwich Mean Time (GMT), in line with neighbor >India." See >< http://today.reuters.co.uk/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=scienceNews&storyI D=2006-04-12T172228Z_01_COL295762_RTRIDST_0_SCIENCE-SRILANKA-TIME-DC.XML <http://today.reuters.co.uk/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=scienceNews&story ID=2006-04-12T172228Z_01_COL295762_RTRIDST_0_SCIENCE-SRILANKA-TIME-DC.XM L> >. >They also report that Buddhist temples and astrologers' offices stuck >with India time, but that's of less importance to us, since we focus >on civil time. > >As luck would have it, though, people who live in regions under Tamil >control (or who live in Buddhist temples etc.) can simply use >TZ='Asia/Calcutta', as that zone has been correct for these regions >since our cutoff date of 1970. However, I suppose I should add a >comment to this effect in the Sri Lanka part of the database. > > > Yes. I think that would be appropriate. Nimal Ratnayake -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Paul Eggert <eggert(a)cs.ucla.edu > Mailed-By: cs.ucla.edu To: Nimal Ratnayake <nimalr(a)pdn.ac.lk> Cc: K Sethu <skhome(a)gmail.com > Date: Apr 25, 2006 1:12 AM Subject: Re: FW: Timezone file asia Nimal Ratnayake <nimalr(a)pdn.ac.lk> writes: > Actually although the time offset is the same as IST, we call it Sri > Lanka Time. > I am tryinng to get some authoritative info from organizations like > the Meteorological > Department, Sri Lanka Standards Institute or ICT Agency of the government. Thanks. I'm also interested as to when this name came into common use. (Presumably it was not called "Sri Lanka Time" back in 1920. :-) --------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Paul Eggert <eggert(a)cs.ucla.edu> Mailed-By: cs.ucla.edu To: K Sethu <skhome(a)gmail.com> Cc: Nimal Ratnayake <nimalr(a)pdn.ac.lk> Date: Apr 25, 2006 5:40 PM Subject: Re: FW: Timezone file asia "K Sethu" < skhome(a)gmail.com> writes: > Within Sri Lanka I think LKT is well known among computer users and > adminsitrators. In my opinion SLT may not be a good choice because the > nation's largest telcom / internet operator Sri Lanka Telcom is well > known by that abbreviation - simply as SLT (there IP domains are > slt.lk <http://slt.lk/> and sltnet.lk <http://sltnet.lk/> ). > > But if indeed our government has adopted SLT as standard abbreviation > (that we have not known so far) then it is better that it be used for > all computers. Thanks for your discussion; it has convinced me to use either LKT or SLT in the next update. Could you please send a copy of your email to < tz(a)elsie.nci.nih.gov>? Thanks. > Hope Nimal gets more authoratative information in his > investigations Yes, I'd also like to know about SLT versus LKT. Thanks.

1 0

Re: Some modifications of China related timezone info.
by Robert Elz April 27, 2006

April 27, 2006

Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 22:54:12 -0400 From: John Hawkinson <jhawk(a)MIT.EDU> Message-ID: <20060428025412.GN677(a)multics.mit.edu> | I can't say I see quite why it is such a bad thing to make exceptions | in the uniform policy where they are clearly understandable and | preferred by most people... I'm skeptical of claims of | non-scalability. The scalability that matters isn't what the zoneinfo files can handle, but what this mailing list can handle. Having a simple rule that always gets followed allows us to ignore endless arguments about what is, or is not, "preferred by most people", and how anyone could ever really tell (when that argument is made, 99% of the time, it means "I prefer".) Of course, we still periodically get this discussion - but at least there's just one of this one, and not the many "this name is better than that name" for any arbitrary name. kre

1 0

Re: Some modifications of China related timezone info.
by Zhe Su April 27, 2006

April 27, 2006

Hi, I don't think modifying front ends is a resonable way for us. Those front ends are out of our control, there is no way for us to convince them to change their front ends. Even if we could convince some of them, it's impossible for us to know and convince all front ends which use tzdata in the world. The simplest way for us is to convince you to modify tzdata, so that all available front ends can benefit from it. Regards James Su On 4/22/06, Paul Eggert <eggert(a)cs.ucla.edu> wrote: > "Zhe Su" <james.su(a)gmail.com> writes: > > > Unfortunately, most front ends (at least on GNU/Linux system) > > expose timezone identifiers like "Asia/Shanghai" to end users directly. > > Then let's focus on getting those front ends fixed the way you like. > > Which front ends are they? The tz code ships only one front end, > called tzselect, which works as shown at the end of this message. > Note that at the crucial decision point, the user selects a #1 entry > labeled "Beijing". So at least this front end works the way that you > like. Perhaps all you need to do is to convince your distributors to > switch to tzselect. Another possibility is for you to find out which > front ends people are using, and fix those front ends. > > $ tzselect > Please identify a location so that time zone rules can be set correctly. > Please select a continent or ocean. > 1) Africa > 2) Americas > 3) Antarctica > 4) Arctic Ocean > 5) Asia > 6) Atlantic Ocean > 7) Australia > 8) Europe > 9) Indian Ocean > 10) Pacific Ocean > 11) none - I want to specify the time zone using the Posix TZ format. > #? 5 > Please select a country. > 1) Afghanistan 18) Israel 35) Palestine > 2) Armenia 19) Japan 36) Philippines > 3) Azerbaijan 20) Jordan 37) Qatar > 4) Bahrain 21) Kazakhstan 38) Russia > 5) Bangladesh 22) Korea (North) 39) Saudi Arabia > 6) Bhutan 23) Korea (South) 40) Singapore > 7) Brunei 24) Kuwait 41) Sri Lanka > 8) Cambodia 25) Kyrgyzstan 42) Syria > 9) China 26) Laos 43) Taiwan > 10) Cyprus 27) Lebanon 44) Tajikistan > 11) East Timor 28) Macau 45) Thailand > 12) Georgia 29) Malaysia 46) Turkmenistan > 13) Hong Kong 30) Mongolia 47) United Arab Emirates > 14) India 31) Myanmar (Burma) 48) Uzbekistan > 15) Indonesia 32) Nepal 49) Vietnam > 16) Iran 33) Oman 50) Yemen > 17) Iraq 34) Pakistan > #? 9 > Please select one of the following time zone regions. > 1) east China - Beijing, Guangdong, Shanghai, etc. > 2) Heilongjiang > 3) central China - Gansu, Guizhou, Sichuan, Yunnan, etc. > 4) Tibet & most of Xinjiang Uyghur > 5) southwest Xinjiang Uyghur > #? 1 > > The following information has been given: > > China > east China - Beijing, Guangdong, Shanghai, etc. > > Therefore TZ='Asia/Shanghai' will be used. > Local time is now: Sat Apr 22 01:03:53 CST 2006. > Universal Time is now: Fri Apr 21 17:03:53 UTC 2006. > Is the above information OK? > 1) Yes > 2) No > #? 1 > > You can make this change permanent for yourself by appending the line > TZ='Asia/Shanghai'; export TZ > to the file '.profile' in your home directory; then log out and log in again. > > Here is that TZ value again, this time on standard output so that you > can use the ./tzselect command in shell scripts: > Asia/Shanghai > > >

1 0