On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 4:40 PM, Tim Parenti <tim@timtimeonline.com> wrote:
On 12 April 2013 04:45, Tobias Conradi <mail.2012@tobiasconradi.com> wrote:
D for %s never means anything else than 1:00 saving.
Within the current tz database, sure, that is presently the case. But this is not necessarily the case within ACTUAL practice;
Sure, actual practice in the IANA time zone database.
"D" could conceivably be used to refer to a DST offset of any amount, since it is still "daylight saving time", just of a different amount. Against actual practice in the IANA time zone database, deteriorating usability for those that rely use systematization.
I am not making the argument here that the terminology is used this way in Australia/Lord_Howe; only that if it is, then LHDT is a perfectly suitable (and indeed, preferred) abbreviation for UTC+10:30+0:30 as observed there in the summer. Why? For other regions the database does not care at all about local usage and will certainly fail in bilingual environments.
To be clear, I haven't seen any evidence either way, but I don't particularly believe any residents of Lord Howe Island would call it "Lord Howe half-daylight time", because to them, half an hour is a full transition. Does that matter?
Granted, this has not always been the case (see four summers from 1981–1982 to 1984–1985), but I suspect residents understood it as a change to "daylight saving time" itself, while still referring to it in the same way. Whatever the case, we should reflect the terminology in use, and not aim for anything more. Oh, why that? And how can that be applied to abbreviations for newly created zones?
On 12 April 2013 08:38, <random832@fastmail.us> wrote:
You are inferring a systematism where non exists.
Precisely. Contradicting your own "Within the current tz database, sure, that is presently the case. "
On 12 April 2013 04:22, Tobias Conradi <tobias.conradi@gmail.com> wrote:
We are not inventing anything new It has been proven you do in the scope of the DB.
I have not been part of this project for very long, but I believe most of the "invented" abbreviations have been simply to fulfill POSIX requirements where no commonly-used English terminology previously existed. POSIX requirements for abbreviations can be fulfilled without English terminology. E.g. WIT could mean Waktu Indonesia Timur (Eastern Indonesian Time) instead of IANA used English Western Indonesia Time.
The English speaking countries largely get their way through with locally used abbreviations, whilst needs and wishes of others are ignored. -- Tobias Conradi Rheinsberger Str. 18 10115 Berlin Germany http://tobiasconradi.com