On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 2:58 AM, Guy Harris <guy@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
On Apr 15, 2013, at 7:59 AM, Tobias Conradi <mail.2012@tobiasconradi.com> wrote:
On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 4:02 PM, Clive D.W. Feather <clive@davros.org> wrote:
What we actually want to know is what Lord Howians actually use. Why? Me not. Localization is out of scope of the database. This belongs to CLDR.
Another way to think about this is to say
The abbreviations supplied by the tz database are the abbreviations appropriate for the C locale.
I guess "C locale" is not restricted Lord Howe English. LHDT and LHHDT are both abbreviations, or more precise acronyms, based on English language words. So both would fulfill the English language requirement and current practice to use this language as acronym source. But only LHHDT is consistent with the current practice for - 0:30 saving xHDT or xHST - 1:00 saving xDT or xST.
For any other locale, go to CLDR.
And, yes, this argues that implementations of the tzname[] array, and of strftime(), in UN*X systems should contain more code than just what you get with tzcode, so that it goes to the CLDR for time zone abbreviations for locales other than the C locale.
It would be convenient if strftime would return MEZ instead of CET. This might be even more important for non-Latin script writing systems. -- Tobias Conradi Rheinsberger Str. 18 10115 Berlin Germany http://tobiasconradi.com