Following the thought given by Paul Eggert (Feb. 10): "But is it worth our time to do, given that we'd be duplicating other people's efforts?" I would like to add: Looking around, for instance at: http://sandbox.xerox.com/stewart/tzconvert.cgi - update: tzdata1999e http://www.timezoneconverter.com/ - update: Oct. 13 1999 http://www.burbs.com/fcgi-bin/tzconvert.fcgi - update: Nov. 15 1998 http://www.bsdi.com/date - update: periodically; seems reasonably up to date but still not tzdata2000a http://www.hilink.com.au/times/ - update: unknown; seems not very up to date (e.g. Tonga) http://www.timeanddate.com/ - update: tzdata2000a ? it can be noticed that it appears very difficult to maintain an up to date timezone converter. At the moment Steffen Thorsen of timeanddate.com spends between 5 and 10 hours weekly maintaining and evolving his site, which is in existence since 1995 (source: http://www.timeanddate.com/steffen/). Very impressive, but for how long from now? Keep in mind that the Olson effort (tzcode & tzdata) exists since 1986. If someone can guarantee that he or she can find the time, energy and resources to maintain for many years an up to date TZ web application, then go ahead. If possible, as Gwillim Law noted Feb. 8, including all historical data. If it cannot be guaranteed that with each tzdata update the web application gets updated too, it could be wise to forget this idea. Don't even bother to produce long lists of time-related (and calendar-related) web links; there are many more and some very good ones at the moment, and it takes a lot of time to keep those lists up to date. My general idea is: without long-term updating guarantees: just stay with a passive web page, promoting the merits of tzcode & tzdata and the "private investigation" services. For the moment, an extra impact should be gained from submitting tz-link.htm to search engines and keepers of lists with time/calendar info. Oscar van Vlijmen 2000-02-11