On 03/07/2016 05:37 PM, Paul Eggert wrote:
On 03/07/2016 02:13 PM, J William Piggott wrote:
1) -0350 - NL; Labrador (southeast) 15) -06 - ON (Rainy R, Ft Frances) 2) -04 - Labrador (most areas) 16) -06 - ON (west); Manitoba 3) -04 - NS (Cape Breton) 17) -06 - SK (midwest) 4) -04 - NS (most areas); PE 18) -06 - SK (most areas) 5) -04 - New Brunswick 19) -07 - AB; BC (E); SK (W) 6) -04 - QC (Lower North Shore) 20) -07 - BC (Creston) 7) -05 - NU (Pangnirtung) 21) -07 - BC (Dawson Cr, Ft St John) 8) -05 - NU (most east areas) 22) -07 - BC (Ft Nelson) 9) -05 - ON (Atikokan); NU (Coral H) 23) -07 - NT (central) 10) -05 - ON (Thunder Bay) 24) -07 - NT (west) 11) -05 - ON, QC (most areas) 25) -07 - NU (west) 12) -05 - ON, QC (no DST 1967-73) 26) -08 - BC (most areas) 13) -06 - NU (Resolute) 27) -08 - Yukon (north) 14) -06 - NU (central) 28) -08 - Yukon (south)
I don't know, I find this list to be confusing. If I see an entry "3) -04 NS ..." I won't know offhand whether to type "3" or "4" or "04". I think I'd feel more comfortable with "AST+ADT" instead of "-04".
Currently tzselect > Africa > Congo (Dem. Rep.) is formatted this way. I don't think it is difficult to discern the select token. This format improves readability in another way , by aligning the local region names in a column. It uses the least number of characters (which is important for zone table comments). It goes along with your push to use offsets instead of alpha zone abbreviations. As already mentioned, facilitates the elimination of manually sorting the zone tables. Having said that, to fully evaluate this concept, a demo zone table should be created; then it's tzselect output can be compared directly against the current tzselect output. I'll try to make time to do that. Unless you're firmly against this format concept?