On Sun, 30 Oct 2022 at 04:41, Paul Eggert <eggert@cs.ucla.edu> wrote:
On 2022-10-29 10:20, Stephen Colebourne via tz wrote:
Can I propose these comments be altered to something like:
# Germany # also applicable since 1970 to Denmark # also applicable since 1970 to Norway # also applicable since 1970 to Sweden
That wording would suggest that Germany is "more important" than the other countries. I expect we'll be better off deemphasizing the role of politics in the data commentary as much as we easily can, and this is why the names are currently listed in simple alphabetical order.
Although we'll get political flames no matter what, we'd likely get more flames if we habitually listed what appears to be the biggest and most powerful country first, followed by a list of its neighbors as seeming appendages.
The definition of Belgium/Luxembourg/Netherlands: Title: 3 lines - Belgium/Luxembourg/Netherlands Commentary about Belgium: 31 lines Rule Belgium: 39 lines Zone Europe/Brussels: 10 lines Apart from the last 2 lines of the Zone, all the remaining lines of the section (97.5%) are exclusively about Belgium. In `backzone` you find Title: Luxembourg Commentary about Luxembourg: 2 lines Rule Lux: 23 lines Zone Europe/Luxembourg: 7 lines Title: Netherlands Commentary about Netherlands: 41 lines Rule Neth: 23 lines Zone Europe/Amsterdam: 6 lines No independent observer will ever describe the data in the main file as equally representing Belgium, Netherlands and Luxembourg. Anyway, I don't care that much, it is your business if you want to leave the section titles claiming something that clearly isn't supported by the section's data. thanks Stephen https://github.com/JodaOrg/global-tz