Re: [tz] Crimea to switch to Moscow Time as of March 30, 2014
Yes, I would, which suggests that a 'disputed' country is a bad idea, but that putting the zones in each country works better. It is important to NOT choose. Julian -----Original Message----- From: Paul_Koning@Dell.com [mailto:Paul_Koning@Dell.com] Sent: 17 March 2014 18:36 To: Julian Cable Subject: Re: [tz] Crimea to switch to Moscow Time as of March 30, 2014 On Mar 17, 2014, at 2:29 PM, Julian Cable <julian.cable@bbc.co.uk> wrote:
I don't think an authority is needed to approve the existence of a dispute.
Would you mark "disputed" no matter who makes the claim of dispute? If yes, you would end up with so many entries that it becomes pointless. If no, then you're choosing authorities - those whose marking you would accept. Is South Korea disputed? Kim III would probably say it is. Is Taiwan disputed? Crimea? Israel? paul ----------------------------- http://www.bbc.co.uk This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and may contain personal views which are not the views of the BBC unless specifically stated. If you have received it in error, please delete it from your system. Do not use, copy or disclose the information in any way nor act in reliance on it and notify the sender immediately. Please note that the BBC monitors e-mails sent or received. Further communication will signify your consent to this. -----------------------------
Julian Cable <julian.cable@bbc.co.uk> writes:
Yes, I would, which suggests that a 'disputed' country is a bad idea, but that putting the zones in each country works better.
It is important to NOT choose.
Unfortunately, putting the zone in both countries is also choosing, since in some of these cases there is a hot political debate over whether the dispute exists. See, for example, the historic situation with Taiwan, in which *both* parties hotly contested the idea that there are two separate countries. (I realize that this has evolved over time and is far more complex than my simple sentence.) We used to run into these problems quite routinely with Usenet newsgroup naming. My experience is that there is simply no safe option. Everything you do, including merely acknowledging the existence of a dispute, will anger someone. The best you can do is manage to find an approach that angers as few people as possible, or somehow punt the problem to some other authority that you can follow blindly and thereby dodge responsibility for the problem. (And frequently even *that* just moves the problem to a debate over which authority to punt to.) -- Russ Allbery (eagle@eyrie.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
participants (2)
-
Julian Cable -
Russ Allbery