There is clearly a conflict of interest here: 1) On one hand, several people would like to simplify the main data table, reducing the number of individual zone records by merging them where they are the same since 1970. The advantage here is that its more concise, easier to maintain, and pretty much all political content could be removed (if country names are removed). I can understand the reasoning. In fact, for many in this group there would be no reason to even maintain any historical tz data in this table, as most downstream users of such a table are only interested in the current zones and their current and upcoming offsets. 2) On the other hand, several people would like to have tz be a source, maintain and collect more historical tz data and organize it by international standards so the historical data can be expanded per country. The key here would be to make the database more accessible to more users and complete for more than just the current zones. As far as I know there is no such database, and as tz moves closer and closer to (1), many users are losing this tz data that was once being collected in tz table per country. I, just one of many, don't want to lose the historical information for Toronto, or Stockholm. I would like it to remain part of the mandate of tz somehow. So, I have a question. And I'm not trying to difficult. Assuming that the goal of (1) is achieved, what can be done to not undermine type 2 users? If we have (1), but also want to maintain and expand historical data per country's zones, how could that be done? using a secondary table? Could the back table be improved, expanded and enhanced?