On Tue, May 07, 2013 at 11:47:32AM -0400, random832@fastmail.us wrote:
http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/tz/1998-August/010224.html ignore the fact that A) the database explicitly identifies what political boundary each timezone falls within in zone.tab and B) even if not, the policy implicitly depends on this by requiring that at least one timezone exist per region
Hmm - is there any official explanation of what zone.tab actually is, apart from the comments inside? It simply lists timezones in use in a specific country, nothing more, nothing less. And timezone identifiers are just identifiers with a minimum of meaning. The timezone database doesn't define what political boundary each timezone falls in. It defines what time zones are in use within political boundaries. Yes, at least one timezone exists for any region, by definition, as long as that region actually has a physical location, as the timezone identifiers are meant to (roughly) identify the largest city within a region (where region is not defined by political boundaries). I really don't understand why people are so obsessed with making the timezone database a political instrument. It shouldn't be.
political pressure. But that ignores the fact that the database is taking a political position _now_, by mentioning a disputed territory in zone.tab.
No, the timezone database does no such thing. It's people who want to change this situation who are politically motivated. It's simple to see: tell me why to change anything here _without_ a political reason. All proponents of change are politically motivated. And so far, it seems all of them use a political interpretation of e.g. zone.tab, when zone.tab itself says no such thing. -- The choice of a Deliantra, the free code+content MORPG -----==- _GNU_ http://www.deliantra.net ----==-- _ generation ---==---(_)__ __ ____ __ Marc Lehmann --==---/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ / schmorp@schmorp.de -=====/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\