- tz - lists.iana.org

Transitions specified for February 29th
by Jon Skeet July 7, 2014

July 7, 2014

I'm just going through my Noda Time <http://nodatime.org> code for time zone handling, and I've noticed I'm being even more defensive than normal, by handling the situation where a time zone transition is specified to occur on the 29th of February - I skip forward or backwards to the nearest leap year. This feels like it's overkill to me, and that it would be better just to prohibit this situation from occurring in my code, *if* it's widely accepted to be invalid data. Is there anything specifying the behaviour if such data is presented? I could try running the zoneinfo compiler myself, but I suspect it would take a long time to get all the tools sorted, and I wouldn't be certain of interpreting the outcome properly. If anyone just *knows,* that would save me a lot of effort :) Jon

2 2

Re: [tz] Fwd: Fwd: [apps-discuss] Proposed working group: Timezone Data Distribution Service (tzdist)
by Barry Leiba July 6, 2014

July 6, 2014

Jon Skeet wrote: > I suppose it's too late to ask them to split "timezone" into "time > zone" everywhere in their documentation etc? Just a minor > peeve, but... Tobias Conradi wrote: > would be nice if you could fix "timezone" to "time zone". I have changed the -04 version of the charter... https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-tzdist/ ...accordingly (and I've asked the Secretariat to fix the working group name, which is a field I can't modify). Assuming the working group is chartered, the text of its documents can be similarly fixed as part of its work. And thanks very much for the comments. If you have further comments on the charter, please post them to <apps-discuss(a)ietf.org>, as that's where people are following the charter discussion for now. Time line: The charter is on the agenda for initial IESG approval on Thursday (10 July). Assuming it is approved then, it will go out for "external review", with messages on the ietf-announce and new-work mailing lists (and I'll make sure it's posted here as well). It will then go back to the IESG for final charter approval, which will likely happen on 7 August. Barry, Applications Area Director

1 0

Time zone vs timezone
by Tobias Conradi July 6, 2014

July 6, 2014

was: Re: [tz] Fwd: Fwd: [apps-discuss] Proposed working group: Timezone Data Distribution Service (tzdist) On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 5:32 PM, todd <tglassey(a)certichron.com> wrote: > > isnt the term TIMEZONE a term of art specific to Time Keeping as a science? Is it? Like HTTP referer (sic) is one for HTTP referrer? Maybe it only is, because some people thought it should be made so. Me, and probably Jon Skeet are only talking about proper (most us) English: 1) https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=time+zone%2CTime+zone%2Ctimez… 2) http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/timezone 3) http://www.britannica.com/search?query=timezone >So what is the issue - proper English then to hide terms which are specific to this realm? Proper English term to make transparent that there is no conceptual difference between the objects the terms refer to. -- Tobias Conradi Rheinsberger Str. 18 10115 Berlin Germany http://tobiasconradi.com

2 1

About Time Zone in Asia/Taipei During World War 2
by Yu-Cheng Chuang July 4, 2014

July 4, 2014

Hello, I'm Yu-Cheng Chuang, a Taiwanese, and also a programmer. I just studied some knowledge about the time zone, and found that there is a commonly-used database maintained by IANA, which is widely used in our UNIX-like OS as well as software systems. I'm a Rails developer, and the TZInfo library derived from the Time Zone Database helped me a lot when building a time-zone-aware feature. It's really very useful. Thank you for making it. When studying these knowledge, as a Taiwanese, I found that during the Japanese era (1895-1945), time zone in Taiwan was mostly UTC+8 (Western Standard Time). However, during the World War II, as a part of Japan, the Japanese emperor ordered that the whole country should adopt the Central Standard Time (UTC+9), including Taiwan as well as overseas territories occupied later during the war (e.g. Hong Kong, Singapore). In the Time Zone database, I found that such fact is recorded on the time zones of its occupied cities: * Hong Kong * Singapore * Rangoon in Myanmar * Dili in East Timor * Jakarta, Pontianak and Makassar in Indonesia * Kuala Lumpur and Kuching in Malaysia * Manila in Philippines However, here Taipei in Taiwan is missing, which during the World War II was still a territory of Japan, and switched to UTC+9 since Oct 1, 1937. In addition, I see that in the section of Japan, Hideyuki Suzuki mentioned Western Standard Time, which was declared in 1895, in the Meiji 19 year ordinance No. 167. I think its declaration might be due to the annexation of Taiwan. Here is a brief history from Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_invasion_of_Taiwan_(1895)) * On April 17, 1895, the Qing Dynasty of China ceded Taiwan and Penghu Islands to Japan. * On May 27, 1895, the Japanese army landed Taiwan, the invasion began. * On Nov 18, 1895, the Taiwan General (from Japan) reported "the whole island is capitulated" to the Japan central government. Then, On Dec 28, 1895, the Meiji Emperor announced Ordinance No. 167 of Meiji Year 28 "The clause about standard time", mentioned that Taiwan and Penghu Islands, as well as Yaeyama and Miyako Islands (both in Okinawa) adopt the Western Standard Time which is based on 120E. The adoption began from Jan 1, 1896. (The original text can be found on Wikisource (http://ja.wikisource.org/wiki/%E6%A8%99%E6%BA%96%E6%99%82%E3%83%8B%E9%97%9C…) However I don't know Japanese language very well; the only way I understand it is through Kanji and Google Translate.) This could be the first adoption of time zone in Taiwan, because during the Qing Dynasty, it seems that there was no time zone declared officially. Later, in the beginning of World War II, on Sep 25, 1937, the Showa Emperor announced Ordinance No. 529 of Showa Year 12 "The clause of revision in the ordinance No. 167 of Meiji year 28 about standard time", in which abolished the adoption of Western Standard Time in western islands (listed above), which means the whole Japan territory, including later occupations, adopt Japan Central Time (UTC+9). The adoption began on Oct 1, 1937. (The original text can be found on Wikisource (http://ja.wikisource.org/wiki/%E6%98%8E%E6%B2%BB%E4%BA%8C%E5%8D%81%E5%85%AB….) That is, the time zone of Taipei switched to UTC+9 on Oct 1, 1937. Of course, after the surrender of Japan, time zone of Taiwan switched back to UTC+8. However I can't find enough evidence to tell when the switch happened. The only thing I know is that the official surrender ceremony is on Oct 25, 1945. From then, Taiwan and Penghu islands are territories of the Republic of China, until now. Again, I only know a little bit Japanese, and as a native Chinese speaker, the only words I can read are nouns written in Kanji (Chinese chars). Therefore, I may misunderstand the Japanese ordinances, but I believe I read them mostly correctly because in that time, most Japanese people write Chinese-like Japanese. I think it would be better to have someone who know Japanese read them directly. Please correct me if I misunderstood anything. I hope that the history above helps you improve the Time Zone database. Sincerely, Yu-Cheng Chuang p.s. References from Wikisource: * Ordinance No. 167 of Meiji Year 28: http://ja.wikisource.org/wiki/%E6%A8%99%E6%BA%96%E6%99%82%E3%83%8B%E9%97%9C… * Ordinance No. 529 of Showa Year 12: http://ja.wikisource.org/wiki/%E6%98%8E%E6%B2%BB%E4%BA%8C%E5%8D%81%E5%85%AB…

3 8

China time zones 1949 - 1980: appeal to speakers of Mandarin
by Alois Treindl July 3, 2014

July 3, 2014

tz database holds that People's Republic of China maintained 5 different time zones between the foundation of the PRC in 1949 and May 1980, when the uniform Beijing timezone (GMT + 8h) was introduced. Various sources claim that this unified country-wide timezone was already introduced in 1949 or early 1950: Several TZ mailing list entries, e.g. 10/16/2010 by Jonathan.Hassid(a)uts.edu.au who writes: "The government in Chengdu (capital of Sichuan province) announced the switch (from "Shulong" (Gansu/Sichuan) time) to Beijing time on 27 Dec. 1949. The rest of the country followed "in early 1950" (dates unspecified), and as I mentioned in my last email, "by the beginning of 1950, within a few months after establishing the country, the entire country except for Xinjiang and Tibet was all using the Beijing Time standard." Paul Eckert tried to get an answer from historian Thomas S Mullaney in a correspondence in February 2008, but the question whether China introduced the unified timezone in 1949 or 1980 remained unanswered by Mullaney (he is currently on leave from Stanford and cannot be contacted). The Wikipedia articles 'Time in China' http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_in_China and 'Historical time zones of China' http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_time_zones_of_China hold that the unified timezone was introduced in 1949. They say: "These time zones were no longer in effective use after 1949, in the Chinese Civil War when the People's Republic of China was established on mainland China. The People's Republic of China uses a single time zone (GMT+8) for the whole country," and "After the Chinese Civil War in 1949, the People's Republic of China established one single time zone (UTC+8) for the entirety of its claimed territories, " I could not identify the source reference for this claim by the Wikipedia authors. I tried to contact one of them, User:Alanmak by various means without success. He seemed to me the main contributor regarding China TZ history. This seems to be a relevant source: Guo, Qingsheng (2003) "Beijing Time at the Beginning of PRC", China Historical Materials of Science and Technology 24(1) It is an article in Chinese (it can be purchased online), and I do not know a translator whom I would trust with translation of such technical or historical detail. It seems to me that the only source claiming the continuation of 5 time zones for China is the International Atlas by Shanks and Pottenger. The overall work of these authors is extremely valuable, but they do not give a source for their China information. Paul Eckert says in tz/asia file: # From Paul Eggert (2008-06-30): # There seems to be a good chance China switched to a single time zone in 1949 # rather than in 1980 as Shanks & Pottenger have it, but we don't have a # reliable documentary source saying so yet, so for now we still go with # Shanks & Pottenger. I agree with Paul's opinion and decision, but find it not acceptable to remain at this degree of uncertainty or such a large area, long time period of 31 years and such a large population of hundreds of millions of people: We do NOT reliably know which timezone there was in January 1980 in large cities like Chengdu or Chongqing. I appeal to those readers of the mailing list capable of reading Chinese / mandarin to look for sources which could - document that multiple timezones where indeed maintained before May 1980 (e.g. railway or airline time tables of that period), - document the transition to a unified zone in May 1980 (legal text, newspaper articles mentioning the time change) - document the government decision for a unified timezone in 1949 My gut feeling is that the unified timezone was introduced in 1949, and that Shanks got it wrong. We need documents to establish that.

7 13

Fwd: [apps-discuss] Proposed working group: Timezone Data Distribution Service (tzdist)
by Mike Douglass July 3, 2014

July 3, 2014

People on this list may be interested in the following. -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [apps-discuss] Proposed working group: Timezone Data Distribution Service (tzdist) Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2014 11:06:51 -0400 From: Barry Leiba <barryleiba(a)computer.org> To: Apps Discuss <apps-discuss(a)ietf.org> Cyrus Daboo has proposed a new working group in the Applications Area, and I'm initiating charter discussion on it: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-tzdist/ We'll have the charter discussion here on apps-discuss. Assuming a working group comes out of this, we'll create a new mailing list for the actual work, once the charter is done. Comments on this charter are welcome. I expect to put it on the 10 July IESG telechat for initial approval, after which it will go out for IETF and external review. So, comments here by 4 July, please. Barry, Applications AD _______________________________________________ apps-discuss mailing list apps-discuss(a)ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss

8 12

Re: [tz] Correct DST in Asia/Taipei (#8)
by Paul Eggert July 3, 2014

July 3, 2014

On 07/02/2014 08:24 AM, Yu-Cheng Chuang wrote: > > *Update*: I've just found the DST bulletin in 1946, and I'm sure that > DST in 1946 was from May 15, not May 1. > > — > Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub > <https://github.com/eggert/tz/pull/8#issuecomment-47790791>. > Thanks. Your previous note said "36 1947 4/15 10/31 11/1", so that "4/15" was a typo, right? It should have been "5/15"? And do you have a URL for the 1946 DST bulletin?

1 0

Bill to return Russia 11 time zones
by vanadovv＠hetnet.nl July 2, 2014

July 2, 2014

In reply to: tz] Bill to return Russia 11 time zones Paul Eggert eggert at cs.ucla.edu Wed Jul 2 05:28:59 UTC 2014 ..... <quote> 3. The following regions were in the 2011 list but are missing in the 2014 list: Alexandrovsk-Sakhalinsky District UTC+11 Anivsky District UTC+11 Dolinsky District UTC+11 Kholmsky District UTC+11 Korsakovsky District UTC+11 Kurilsky District (Kuril Islands) UTC+11 Makarovsky District UTC+11 Nevelsky District UTC+11 Nogliksky District UTC+11 Okhinsky District UTC+11 Poronaysky District UTC+11 Smirnykhovsky District UTC+11 Tomarinsky District UTC+11 Tymovsky District UTC+11 Uglegorsky District UTC+11 Yuzhno-Kurilsky District (Kuril Islands) UTC+11 I am worried about (3). Have these districts been abolished, or have their 2014 time zones not been decided yet, or what? </quote> Reply: Nothing to worry about. Like in the previous law (Sept. 2011) simply all 18 districts of the Sakhalinskaya oblast' are listed. Oscar van Vlijmen

1 0

[PATCH] More spelling and accent fixes.
by vanadovv＠hetnet.nl July 2, 2014

July 2, 2014

In reply to: [tz] [PATCH] More spelling and accent fixes. Paul Eggert eggert at CS.UCLA.EDU Fri Jun 27 23:06:47 UTC 2014 A small problem regarding the transition to UTF-8. Let me refer to a copy of some text from the diff, sent through the mailing list: @@ -383,7 +383,7 @@ Zone Asia/Chongqing 7:06:20 - LMT 1928 # or Chungking # Wusu, Qiemo, Xinyan, Wulanwusu, Jinghe, Yumin, Tacheng, Tuoli, Emin, # Shihezi, Changji, Yanqi, Heshuo, Tuokexun, Tulufan, Shanshan, Hami, # Fukang, Kuitun, Kumukuli, Miquan, Qitai, and Turfan. -Zone Asia/Urumqi 5:50:20 - LMT 1928 # ÃœrÃ¼mqi or Urumchi +Zone Asia/Urumqi 5:50:20 - LMT 1928 # ÃœrÃ¼mqi or ÃœrÃ¼mchi The correct spelling of the Asian city at hand is Ürümchi, with two u-diaeresis. The github asia file has the correct spelling and the correct encoding. The diff file however gets mangled by some publishing process. Hence, the diff published through the mailing list is rather useless. I have a lot of text encoding conversion filters, but noone is able to decode the mangled "ÃœrÃ¼mqi". It looks to me like a doubly UTF-8 encoded piece of text. Perhaps something to look into? Oscar van Vlijmen

5 8

[PATCH 0/2] Follow Australian common usage and update CST/CST to CST/CDT and EST/EST to EST/EDT etc [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
by Timothy Arceri July 2, 2014

July 2, 2014

After reading the 'Procedures for Maintaining the Time Zone Database' document and the comments in the Australasia data file about how the Australian abbreviations were decided I've come to a better understanding of the current situation and the tz database maintainers position on using common usage for abbreviations. I've come to the conclusion that while I still think 'A' should be added to the front of the Australian abbreviations, we are yet to give conclusive evidence that this is in fact what is the most common usage in Australia (even though as an Australian I know it is). Despite the that fact that these abbreviations are defined on multiple government websites the TZ database maintainers have clearly laid out the terms for changes (no matter how much I disagree, and how difficult proving common usage is) However there *is* one abbreviations common usage that we have proven using the similar methods used by the maintainers for surveying usage. Which is backed up by each government website regardless of the inconsistent use of a leading 'A'. The 'Procedures for Maintaining the Time Zone Database' document clearly states we should first attempt to resolve any concern with the TZ Coordinator, but so far Paul has remained silent on this issue choosing rather to respond only in regards to the use of the leading 'A'. I'm appealing to Paul to please respond either accepting this patch or voicing any remaining concerns. For those that missed our results here they are: * Google search results, do Australians more often use "EDT" or "EST"? 875,000 "Eastern Standard Time (EST)" site:.au 655,000 "Eastern Standard Time (AEST)" site:.au 6 "Eastern Summer Time (EST)" site:.au 64 "Eastern Summer Time (AEST)" site:.au 30,500 "Eastern Daylight Time (EDT)" site:.au 180,000 "Eastern Daylight Time (AEDT)" site:.au 357,000 "Central Standard Time (CST)" site:.au 316 "Central Standard Time (ACST)" site:.au 4 "Central Summer Time (CST)" site:.au 0 "Central Summer Time (ACST)" site:.au 19,600 "Central Daylight Time (CDT)" site:.au 157 "Central Daylight Time (ACDT)" site:.au Here we are only looking at cases where the time zone abbreviation has been defined as anything else is misleading. These results show that the abbreviation for Daylight time EDT/AEDT/CDT/ACDT is overwhelmingly greater than the usage of the abbreviation for Summer time EST/AEST/CST/ACST. The reason for the current situation is documented in the Australasia data file: >From John Mackin (1991-03-06): "We in Australia have _never_ referred to DST as `daylight' time. It is called `summer' time. Now by a happy coincidence, `summer' and `standard' happen to start with the same letter; hence, the abbreviation does _not_ change..." There is no survey of common use, just one man's assertion that this is what the abbreviation should be no matter how ridiculous it is to use the same abbreviation for two different phrases within the same time zone. Aside from the many other problems I have with his statements (such as not a single reference to show the use of the abbreviations) there is one thing that I would like to point out. These three letters are used as identifiers so that they can be associated with a phrase by human (its already been stated they are useless computationally), and in Johns own words they are abbreviations or as a trusty dictionary will show 'shortening something by omitting parts of it'. It does not matter what letter the word starts with its not an acronym it's an abbreviation. Take the this Australian island for example 'C'o'c'os Islands 'T'ime (CCT). Using the same abbreviations for different phrase's while probably done with good intentions has been a confusing mistake all along with no references of its common use. Having said all this the survey results speak for themselves. Please fix this issue. The following two emails contain patches for the Australasia and Antarctica data files. As well as the abbreviations I have updated the comments section for Australia to include the justification for this update and also updated a couple of out-dated links. Thanks for your time, Timothy Arceri

6 9