Moscow DST correction

Diffs related to europe 7.38 *** europe.orig Thu Jul 18 00:54:30 1996 --- europe Sun Sep 29 19:20:56 1996 *************** *** 852,858 **** Rule Russia 1921 only - Oct 1 0:00 0 K Rule Russia 1981 1984 - Apr 1 0:00 1:00 D Rule Russia 1981 1983 - Oct 1 0:00 0 K ! Rule Russia 1984 max - Sep lastSun 2:00s 0 K Rule Russia 1985 max - Mar lastSun 2:00s 1:00 D # These are for backward compatibility with older versions. --- 852,859 ---- Rule Russia 1921 only - Oct 1 0:00 0 K Rule Russia 1981 1984 - Apr 1 0:00 1:00 D Rule Russia 1981 1983 - Oct 1 0:00 0 K ! Rule Russia 1984 1995 - Sep lastSun 2:00s 0 K ! Rule Russia 1996 max - Oct lastSun 2:00s 0 K Rule Russia 1985 max - Mar lastSun 2:00s 1:00 D # These are for backward compatibility with older versions. -- Andrey A. Chernov <ache@nagual.ru> http://www.nagual.ru/~ache/

Thanks for the fix for Russia. Here is a patch to the latest tz data. For now, I'll assume that Crimea, Kazakhstan, and Kirgizstan stay in sync with Russia; so this patch fixes `asia', too. (It also corrects the spelling of your name in some older comments; sorry about that.) By the way, for Ukraine, Itar-Tass <URL:http://www.itar-tass.com/tassnews.htm> (1996-09-29) reports: 09-18 00:43 Crimea ponders over problem of time zone. 09-12 16:48 Ukraine extends summer time for economic benefits. For now I'll assume that this means Crimea's clocks continue to match Moscow's exactly; and that Ukraine's fall switch is now at the end of October. These assumptions don't require any further changes to the tz tables. =================================================================== RCS file: RCS/europe,v retrieving revision 1996.11 retrieving revision 1996.11.1.1 diff -c -r1996.11 -r1996.11.1.1 *** europe 1996/09/08 20:06:17 1996.11 --- europe 1996/09/29 19:22:47 1996.11.1.1 *************** *** 836,850 **** Rule Russia 1919 only - Aug 16 0:00 0 - Rule Russia 1921 only - Feb 14 23:00 1:00 S # Shanks gives 1921 Mar 21 for the following transition. ! # From Andrew A. Chernov <ache@astral.msk.su> (November 12, 1993): # My sources says, that it is Mar 20, not 21. Rule Russia 1921 only - Mar 20 23:00 2:00 DS Rule Russia 1921 only - Sep 1 0:00 1:00 S Rule Russia 1921 only - Oct 1 0:00 0 - Rule Russia 1981 1984 - Apr 1 0:00 1:00 S Rule Russia 1981 1983 - Oct 1 0:00 0 - ! Rule Russia 1984 max - Sep lastSun 2:00s 0 - Rule Russia 1985 max - Mar lastSun 2:00s 1:00 S # These are for backward compatibility with older versions. --- 836,852 ---- Rule Russia 1919 only - Aug 16 0:00 0 - Rule Russia 1921 only - Feb 14 23:00 1:00 S # Shanks gives 1921 Mar 21 for the following transition. ! # From Andrey A. Chernov <ache@astral.msk.su> (November 12, 1993): # My sources says, that it is Mar 20, not 21. Rule Russia 1921 only - Mar 20 23:00 2:00 DS Rule Russia 1921 only - Sep 1 0:00 1:00 S Rule Russia 1921 only - Oct 1 0:00 0 - Rule Russia 1981 1984 - Apr 1 0:00 1:00 S Rule Russia 1981 1983 - Oct 1 0:00 0 - ! Rule Russia 1984 1995 - Sep lastSun 2:00s 0 - Rule Russia 1985 max - Mar lastSun 2:00s 1:00 S + # From Andrey A. Chernov <ache@nagual.ru> (1996-09-29): + Rule Russia 1996 max - Oct lastSun 2:00s 0 - # These are for backward compatibility with older versions. *************** *** 1745,1751 **** # a 6 day week; on 1940-06-27 it returned to the Gregorian week. # # From Paul Eggert <eggert@twinsun.com> (1996-09-03): ! # Moscow rules after 1991 are from Andrew A. Chernov <ache@astral.msk.su>. # I invented the time zone names, and (unless otherwise specified) # guessed what happened after 1991; the clocks were chaotic, and we know little. # The rest is from Shanks. --- 1747,1753 ---- # a 6 day week; on 1940-06-27 it returned to the Gregorian week. # # From Paul Eggert <eggert@twinsun.com> (1996-09-03): ! # Moscow rules after 1991 are from Andrey A. Chernov <ache@astral.msk.su>. # I invented the time zone names, and (unless otherwise specified) # guessed what happened after 1991; the clocks were chaotic, and we know little. # The rest is from Shanks. =================================================================== RCS file: RCS/asia,v retrieving revision 1996.11 retrieving revision 1996.11.1.1 diff -c -r1996.11 -r1996.11.1.1 *** asia 1996/09/08 20:06:16 1996.11 --- asia 1996/09/29 19:22:47 1996.11.1.1 *************** *** 52,59 **** # Rule NAME FROM TO TYPE IN ON AT SAVE LETTER/S Rule RussiaAsia 1981 1984 - Apr 1 0:00 1:00 S Rule RussiaAsia 1981 1983 - Oct 1 0:00 0 - ! Rule RussiaAsia 1984 max - Sep lastSun 2:00s 0 - Rule RussiaAsia 1985 max - Mar lastSun 2:00s 1:00 S # Afghanistan # Zone NAME GMTOFF RULES FORMAT [UNTIL] --- 52,60 ---- # Rule NAME FROM TO TYPE IN ON AT SAVE LETTER/S Rule RussiaAsia 1981 1984 - Apr 1 0:00 1:00 S Rule RussiaAsia 1981 1983 - Oct 1 0:00 0 - ! Rule RussiaAsia 1984 1995 - Sep lastSun 2:00s 0 - Rule RussiaAsia 1985 max - Mar lastSun 2:00s 1:00 S + Rule RussiaAsia 1996 max - Oct lastSun 2:00s 0 - # Afghanistan # Zone NAME GMTOFF RULES FORMAT [UNTIL]

Thanks for the fix for Russia. Here is a patch to the latest tz data.
BTW, what are the strange Moscow timezone names in latest tz data? 1981 1984 - Apr 1 0:00 1:00 S ^^^^^^ 1981 1983 - Oct 1 0:00 0 - ^^^^^^ Moscow standard/daylight always stays as MSK/MSD, but I find some cryptic MOS%sT things instead in new version :-( Such names never used here. Please back out this change if it isn't based on some strong international standard. Many software here already knows about MSK/MSD but never hear about MOSST. -- Andrey A. Chernov <ache@nagual.ru> http://www.nagual.ru/~ache/

Date: Mon, 30 Sep 1996 18:29:02 +0400 (MSD) From: =?KOI8-R?Q?=E1=CE=C4=D2=C5=CA_=FE=C5=D2=CE=CF=D7?= (Andrey A. Chernov) <ache@nagual.ru> Moscow standard/daylight always stays as MSK/MSD, but I find some cryptic MOS%sT things instead in new version :-( Unfortunately, there is no standard in this area. This change was made as part of an effort to consistently use English abbreviations in time zone names, to avoid disputes about whether, for example, the time in Central Europe should be called `CET' (English) or `MEZ' (German); or whether the time in Montreal should be called `EST' (English) or `HNE' (French); or, to use a problem specific to Russia, whether the time zone abbreviation for Yakutsk should be written in Russian or in Yakut. For more details about this effort, please see the file `africa' (look for ``time zone abbreviations''). What do the abbreviations `MSK' and `MSD' stand for? If they're English already, then we should definitely change the database back. But I have the vague impression that they are Russian phrases or abbreviations. Such names never used here. Please back out this change ... If `MSK' and `MSD' are not English, it would be more consistent to add a zone `MSK' for backward compatibility instead, as follows; would this do? =================================================================== RCS file: RCS/europe,v retrieving revision 1996.11.1.1 retrieving revision 1996.11.1.2 diff -c -r1996.11.1.1 -r1996.11.1.2 *** europe 1996/09/29 19:22:47 1996.11.1.1 --- europe 1996/09/30 22:12:21 1996.11.1.2 *************** *** 855,860 **** --- 855,861 ---- Zone CET 1:00 C-Eur CE%sT Zone MET 1:00 C-Eur ME%sT Zone EET 2:00 EU EE%sT + Zone MSK 3:00 Russia MSK/MSD # Previous editions of this database used abbreviations like MET DST # for Central European Summer Time, but this didn't agree with common usage.

What do the abbreviations `MSK' and `MSD' stand for? If they're English already, then we should definitely change the database back. But I have the vague impression that they are Russian phrases or abbreviations.
MSK/MSD not English, they are Russian/German, origins are: Moskva (Russian) and Moskau (German) The main problems with your new names is that they comes too late: MSK/MSD already used here approx. 10 years! Don't be English-centric, be Latin(ASCII)-centric instead. Really, if national name is 1) pure ASCII 2) widely used for long time it is enough reasons to use it.
Such names never used here. Please back out this change ...
If `MSK' and `MSD' are not English, it would be more consistent to add a zone `MSK' for backward compatibility instead, as follows; would this do?
I suspect backward capability isn't enough. Users becomes very confused seeing MOST instead of MSK which they see for many years. Date parsers becomes very confused too. Your change just breaks all Russian time-parsing software. Please, note that all I say is about Moscow time zone only, I don't know situation for other Russian zones abbreviations. -- Andrey A. Chernov <ache@nagual.ru> http://www.nagual.ru/~ache/

From: Andrey A. Chernov <ache@nagual.ru> Date: Tue, 1 Oct 1996 10:25:25 +0400 (MSD) Please, note that all I say is about Moscow time zone only, I don't know situation for other Russian zones abbreviations. Other Russian zones were a mess. For example, the abbreviations for Kuybyshev (UTC+4) were `KSK' and `KSD', which were incorrect. I originally used `KSK' and `KSD' for Kuybyshev because I mistakenly thought that `SK' and `SD' were acronyms for standard and daylight time -- I didn't know that the `SK' was the `SK' in `Moskva'. This needed fixing. I suspect backward capability isn't enough. Under the latest proposed patch, people who prefer `MSK'/`MSD' can use TZ="MSK"; won't this give them the behavior that they're used to? The main problems with your new names is that they comes too late: MSK/MSD already used here approx. 10 years! We recently changed `MET'/`MET DST' to `CET'/`CEST'; even though the former abbreviations had been in use for over 10 years by some computer users, they didn't match real-world usage. I looked hard for commonly-used English abbreviations or names for the Russian time zones. I couldn't find any phrases other than ``Moscow time'', ``Novosibirsk time'', etc. Given the problems we had been starting to see with disputes about which language to use in other locales, I've been trying to stick to a policy that the tz database is in English and needs translations to other languages. An advantage of using the first three letters of the English name for the city is that the resulting abbreviations `MOST', `NOVT', etc. are not likely to be mistaken for common abbreviations like `MST'. By the way, I just took a census of Usenet articles on file at twinsun.com that had Moscow time in their `Date:' line, followed by the time zone abbreviation in a comment. Admittedly this is a small sample, since most Usenet articles don't include the abbreviations, and we subscribe only to technical news articles here. That being said, of 377,986 articles on file, of which 1,175 contained time zone abbreviations in comments, I found only one article that used `MSD'; the other 23 articles from UTC+0400 with time zone abbreviations used the obsolete abbreviation `WSU DST' (which clearly won't do).

I suspect backward capability isn't enough.
Under the latest proposed patch, people who prefer `MSK'/`MSD' can use TZ="MSK"; won't this give them the behavior that they're used to?
Yes, but since it isn't default variant, it always needs special sysadmin attention to maintain. Moreover, some people never heard of timezone and would use default variant assuming it is right (and it isn't) causing troubles for themselfs and others such as rewritting all Date: parsing software which already knows about MSK/MSD and knows nothing about new ones. If you count all money which will be spent to adapt to new situation, it will be too high price for aesthetical purity.
The main problems with your new names is that they comes too late: MSK/MSD already used here approx. 10 years!
We recently changed `MET'/`MET DST' to `CET'/`CEST'; even though the former abbreviations had been in use for over 10 years by some computer users, they didn't match real-world usage.
Why you not try to change GMT to something else? Assume that this idea becomes reality and you understand my complaints. MSK/MSD sounds here like GMT for you.
I looked hard for commonly-used English abbreviations or names for the Russian time zones. I couldn't find any phrases other than ``Moscow time'', ``Novosibirsk time'', etc. Given the problems we had been starting to see with disputes about which language to use in other locales, I've been trying to stick to a policy that the tz database is in English and needs translations to other languages.
Russian time zones never abbreviated in civil live, so don't even try to search for them. MSK/MSD abbreviation was born in computers world initially. I don't understand why you insist on some meaning of timezone abbreviation, lets look at them as at abstract ascii labels. Most of timezone abbreviations already are cryptic enough for unexperienced user. Only one requirement will be needed: ascii label must be unique. If timezone abbreviation comes to you from native background, please don't change it.
An advantage of using the first three letters of the English name for the city is that the resulting abbreviations `MOST', `NOVT', etc. are not likely to be mistaken for common abbreviations like `MST'.
This idea not save you for cities with equal 3-letters prefixes case. IMHO the better way is using model with higher abstraction level.
By the way, I just took a census of Usenet articles on file at twinsun.com that had Moscow time in their `Date:' line, followed by
Usenet RFC 1036 _not_ allows usage of timezone abbreviations except few standard North American timezones, proper News Agents always use GMT+0400 instead of MSD. -- Andrey A. Chernov <ache@nagual.ru> http://www.nagual.ru/~ache/

Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 14:23:10 +0400 (MSD) From: =?KOI8-R?Q?=E1=CE=C4=D2=C5=CA_=FE=C5=D2=CE=CF=D7?= (Andrey A. Chernov) <ache@nagual.ru> Message-ID: <199610021023.OAA00834@nagual.ru> Only one requirement will be needed: ascii label must be unique. I have no idea what the right solution for the timezones for Moskow should be, but I know this is a fruitless ambition. Time zone names (abbreviations) are not unique, will never be unique, and hoping for such a thing, or doing anything at all assuming such a thing, is pointless, silly, and dangerous. The zone names should only ever be used as a warm & friendly for output to humans, so they have some idea whether it the time is probably in the local zone, some nearby friendly zone, or someplace else, and even then it doesn't work well. The abbreviation where I am is EST now, will be EST in a month when summer time starts and the zone shifts by an hour, and is not at all related to the EST that exists 9sometimes) in the eastern part of the US. Further, if I felt like using Melbourne Standard Time (MST) for my system I would, then in summer I might use Melbourne Standard Daylight Time and abbreviate that as MSD. One of the nice things about the zoneinfo timezone config system, is that everyone can use whatever they like - if you don't like what is in the files for your zone, simply change it, it's easy. On the other hand, any code that attempts to parse time zone abbreviations should be broken, and broken as frequently as possible, until people finally give up writing such nonsense. kre

Time zone names (abbreviations) are not unique, will never be unique, and hoping for such a thing, or doing anything at all assuming such a thing, is pointless, silly, and dangerous.
The zone names should only ever be used as a warm & friendly for output to humans, so they have some idea whether it the time is
Ok, your point of view have enough reasons to exists, I not attempt to agrue with you here. But even from your point of view preserving old MSK/MSD is nice idea because of "warm & friendly for output to [Russian] humans" at least. -- Andrey A. Chernov <ache@nagual.ru> http://www.nagual.ru/~ache/

Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 20:38:54 +0400 (MSD) From: =?KOI8-R?Q?=E1=CE=C4=D2=C5=CA_=FE=C5=D2=CE=CF=D7?= (Andrey A. Chernov) <ache@nagual.ru> Message-ID: <199610021638.UAA02435@nagual.ru> But even from your point of view preserving old MSK/MSD is nice idea because of "warm & friendly for output to [Russian] humans" at least. Yes, as I said, what should be used there I made no comment on, and I admit to not being a fan of the "everything must be consistent and exactly this way" approach. Whatever works and people are happy with suits me. kre

In message <199610021023.OAA00834@nagual.ru>, Andrey A. Chernov wrote:
Why you not try to change GMT to something else? Assume that this idea becomes reality and you understand my complaints. MSK/MSD sounds here like GMT for you.
Actually, I *do* suggest to change all occurances of the string GMT in tzdata to UTC, the correct modern term. Reasonable exceptions are only comment text references to historic time zones before 1972 (when UTC replaced GMT as the reference time and GMT was redefined and replaced by the term UT1) and where the term GMT is necessary for backwards compatibility. UTC is the official term even in the U.S. now (according to USNO folks since 1986). If you listen with your shortwave radio to WWV (2.5, 5, 10, or 15 MHz), the U.S. NIST time announcement broadcast says: "At the tone ... twenty-three hours ... fifty-nine minutes ... coordinated universal time ... beep". Markus -- Markus G. Kuhn, Computer Science grad student, Purdue University, Indiana, USA -- email: kuhn@cs.purdue.edu

Date: Wed, 02 Oct 1996 15:06:06 -0500 From: kuhn@cs.purdue.edu ("Markus G. Kuhn") Actually, I *do* suggest to change all occurances of the string GMT in tzdata to UTC, the correct modern term. That's a good suggestion for Etc/UTC and Etc/Universal, since anybody who chooses those zones probably wants `UTC'. (Also, Etc/UCT should probably generate `UCT' instead of the current `GMT'.) I'll draft a patch along those lines. However, I'm not sure it's a good idea for entries like Europe/London. English speakers most commonly use `GMT' to describe the standard time in Britain. The tz database tries to use an abbreviation for the English phrase that's most commonly used for the time in a location. Reasonable exceptions are only comment text references to historic time zones before 1972 (when UTC replaced GMT as the reference time As far as I know, GMT hasn't been an official reference time since the 1920s. Even though the reference standard has changed a few times since then, the public continues to call it `GMT'. This is understandable, since the changes to the standard don't matter to most people. I also used to believe that UTC was established in 1972, but I've been corrected. UTC was introduced in 1961. It was originally kept close to UT1 by periodically adding or subtracting steps of a fraction of a second. 1972 is when the current leap-second regime was instituted.

In message <199610032320.QAA04986@shade.twinsun.com>, Paul Eggert wrote:
That's a good suggestion for Etc/UTC and Etc/Universal, since anybody who chooses those zones probably wants `UTC'. (Also, Etc/UCT should probably generate `UCT' instead of the current `GMT'.)
What is UCT supposed to mean and why is it defined there? I have never heard this term before. Is it supposed to be "Universal Coordinated Time"??? Two alternative original abbreviation proposals were CUT (English: Coordinated Universal Time) and TUC (francais: temps universel coordine), but UTC was selected both as a compromise between the French and English proposals and because the C at the end looks more like an index in UT0, UT1, UT2 and a mathematical style notation is always the most international approach. See also <URL:http://www.boulder.nist.gov/timefreq/faq/faq.htm>: Why is the abbreviation for Coordinated Universal Time "UTC" instead of "CUT"? In 1970 the Coordinated Universal Time system was devised by an international advisory group of technical experts within the International Telecommunication Union (ITU). The ITU felt it was best to designate a single abbreviation for use in all languages in order to minimize confusion. Since unanimous agreement could not be achieved on using either the English word order, CUT, or the French word order, TUC, a compromise of using neither, UTC, was adopted. Is Coordinated Universal Time (UTC) the same thing as Greenwich Mean Time (GMT)? Greenwich Mean Time (GMT) is a 24 hour astronomical time system based on the local time at Greenwich, England. GMT can be considered equivalent to Coordinated Universal Time (UTC) when fractions of a second are not important. However, by international agreement, the term UTC is recommended for all general timekeeping applications, and use of the term GMT is discouraged.
As far as I know, GMT hasn't been an official reference time since the 1920s.
Yes, I have seen various references to some IAU conference in 1928 where an agreement was reached that the term Univeral Time (UT) shall be used, and this term has since then indeed be used quite consistently in the astronomical literature. I have never read GMT in any recent paper in "Astronomy and Astrophysics", only UT (especially when second precision is not relevant), or UTC/UT1/etc. if subsecond precision is relevant.
From <URL:http://community.bellcore.com/mbr/gmt-explained.html>:
In 1928, the International Astronomical Union recommended that the time used in the compilation of astronomical almanacs, essentially GMT, or what was also sometimes called Greenwich Civil Time, be referred to as Universal Time. The terms "Universal Time" and "Universal Day" were introduced at the various conferences in the 1800's held to set up the standard time system.
Even though the reference standard has changed a few times since then, the public continues to call it `GMT'.
I feel, GMT is only widely known in English speaking countries. In Germany for instance, the term Weltzeit (translates as "world time" or may be "universal time") is usualy used (for example on shortwave radio, Deutsche Welle ~6.1 MHz) and the time zone map that you'll find in geography school books and for example in the information booklets in every Lufthansa plane say UTC and not GMT. BTW: Quite a number of on-line ressources about time are available on <URL:http://www.yahoo.com/Science/Weights_and_Measures/Measurements/Time/>. I would exchange GMT for UTC as in the patch below. This patch also removes UCT, assuming that this is the abbreviation for "Universal Coordinated Time", something I have never encountered outside the etcetera file. Markus -- Markus G. Kuhn, Computer Science grad student, Purdue University, Indiana, USA -- email: kuhn@cs.purdue.edu --- etcetera.orig Thu Oct 3 20:08:28 1996 +++ etcetera Thu Oct 3 21:13:49 1996 @@ -1,55 +1,60 @@ # @(#)etcetera 7.5 # All of these are set up just so people can "zic -l" to a timezone # that's right for their area, even if it doesn't have a name or DST rules # (half hour zones are too much to bother with -- when someone asks!) +Zone Etc/UTC 0 - UTC +Link Etc/UTC Etc/Universal +Link Etc/UTC Etc/UTC-0 +Link Etc/UTC Etc/UTC+0 +Link Etc/UTC Etc/UTC0 +Link Etc/UTC Etc/Zulu + +# Since the early 1970s, UTC has been the correct official term for +# the international reference time zone defined in ITU-R +# Recommendation TF.460-4. For old-fashioned British patriots, we +# still offer the classic name of this time zone: + Zone Etc/GMT 0 - GMT -Link Etc/GMT Etc/UTC -Link Etc/GMT Etc/UCT -Link Etc/GMT Etc/Universal Link Etc/GMT Etc/Greenwich -Link Etc/GMT Etc/Zulu -Link Etc/GMT Etc/GMT-0 -Link Etc/GMT Etc/GMT+0 -Link Etc/GMT Etc/GMT0 # We use POSIX-style signedness in the names and output, # internal-style signedness in the specifications. -# For example, TZ=Etc/GMT+4 corresponds to 4 hours _behind_ GMT; -# it is equivalent to TZ=GMT+4, which is implemented directly as per POSIX. +# For example, TZ=Etc/UTC+4 corresponds to 4 hours _behind_ UTC; +# it is equivalent to TZ=UTC+4, which is implemented directly as per POSIX. # Earlier incarnations of this package were not POSIX-compliant, # and had lines such as -# Zone GMT-12 -12 - GMT-1200 +# Zone UTC-12 -12 - UTC-1200 # We did not want things to change quietly if someone accustomed to the old # way does a -# zic -l GMT-12 +# zic -l UTC-12 # so we moved the names into the Etc subdirectory. -Zone Etc/GMT-14 14 - GMT-14 # 14 hours ahead of GMT -Zone Etc/GMT-13 13 - GMT-13 -Zone Etc/GMT-12 12 - GMT-12 -Zone Etc/GMT-11 11 - GMT-11 -Zone Etc/GMT-10 10 - GMT-10 -Zone Etc/GMT-9 9 - GMT-9 -Zone Etc/GMT-8 8 - GMT-8 -Zone Etc/GMT-7 7 - GMT-7 -Zone Etc/GMT-6 6 - GMT-6 -Zone Etc/GMT-5 5 - GMT-5 -Zone Etc/GMT-4 4 - GMT-4 -Zone Etc/GMT-3 3 - GMT-3 -Zone Etc/GMT-2 2 - GMT-2 -Zone Etc/GMT-1 1 - GMT-1 -Zone Etc/GMT+1 -1 - GMT+1 -Zone Etc/GMT+2 -2 - GMT+2 -Zone Etc/GMT+3 -3 - GMT+3 -Zone Etc/GMT+4 -4 - GMT+4 -Zone Etc/GMT+5 -5 - GMT+5 -Zone Etc/GMT+6 -6 - GMT+6 -Zone Etc/GMT+7 -7 - GMT+7 -Zone Etc/GMT+8 -8 - GMT+8 -Zone Etc/GMT+9 -9 - GMT+9 -Zone Etc/GMT+10 -10 - GMT+10 -Zone Etc/GMT+11 -11 - GMT+11 -Zone Etc/GMT+12 -12 - GMT+12 +Zone Etc/UTC-14 14 - UTC-14 # 14 hours ahead of UTC +Zone Etc/UTC-13 13 - UTC-13 +Zone Etc/UTC-12 12 - UTC-12 +Zone Etc/UTC-11 11 - UTC-11 +Zone Etc/UTC-10 10 - UTC-10 +Zone Etc/UTC-9 9 - UTC-9 +Zone Etc/UTC-8 8 - UTC-8 +Zone Etc/UTC-7 7 - UTC-7 +Zone Etc/UTC-6 6 - UTC-6 +Zone Etc/UTC-5 5 - UTC-5 +Zone Etc/UTC-4 4 - UTC-4 +Zone Etc/UTC-3 3 - UTC-3 +Zone Etc/UTC-2 2 - UTC-2 +Zone Etc/UTC-1 1 - UTC-1 +Zone Etc/UTC+1 -1 - UTC+1 +Zone Etc/UTC+2 -2 - UTC+2 +Zone Etc/UTC+3 -3 - UTC+3 +Zone Etc/UTC+4 -4 - UTC+4 +Zone Etc/UTC+5 -5 - UTC+5 +Zone Etc/UTC+6 -6 - UTC+6 +Zone Etc/UTC+7 -7 - UTC+7 +Zone Etc/UTC+8 -8 - UTC+8 +Zone Etc/UTC+9 -9 - UTC+9 +Zone Etc/UTC+10 -10 - UTC+10 +Zone Etc/UTC+11 -11 - UTC+11 +Zone Etc/UTC+12 -12 - UTC+12

Markus G. Kuhn wrote:
[snip]
Why is the abbreviation for Coordinated Universal Time "UTC" instead of "CUT"?
In 1970 the Coordinated Universal Time system was devised by an international advisory group of technical experts within the International Telecommunication Union (ITU). The ITU felt it was best to designate a single abbreviation for use in all languages in order to minimize confusion. Since unanimous agreement could not be achieved on using either the English word order, CUT, or the French word order, TUC, a compromise of using neither, UTC, was adopted. [snip]
I had also heard that the Dutch didn't like it since it's pronounced like their word "kut" which means the same as a similar to an English word containing an 'n'. (Rather like the Germans objecting to the Anglo-French compromise of ECU in financial circles.)
[snip]
Even though the reference standard has changed a few times since then, the public continues to call it `GMT'.
I feel, GMT is only widely known in English speaking countries. In Germany for instance, the term Weltzeit (translates as "world time" or may be "universal time") is usualy used (for example on shortwave radio, Deutsche Welle ~6.1 MHz) and the time zone map that you'll find in geography school books and for example in the information booklets in every Lufthansa plane say UTC and not GMT.
Dear Markus, I have a great respect for your wisdom and knowledge, but there are other references on this planet than the Official German Time Office (who convinced you that CET and CEST were the correct abbreviations) and the German Airline. In order to be just as patriotically parochial, might I point out that the BBC World Service, (the world reference for broadcasting quality :-) ) with an audience of hundreds of millions all over the world, a very large percentage of whom do not have English as their first language, only ever gives time in 'GMT'. Most of its audience has never heard of UTC as is the case for a large proportion of the English-speaking world - just pop down your Purdue corridor and ask a handful of people (not involved in this sort of thing) what the "official" name for International Time is. (Ignore those who reply "Eastern Standard Time"!) The French, by the way, generally refer, still, to TU. (Coordine ou pas!).
I would exchange GMT for UTC as in the patch below. This patch also removes UCT, assuming that this is the abbreviation for "Universal Coordinated Time", something I have never encountered outside the etcetera file.
I'd leave GMT as it is. UCT, I agree, should be buried. Pete -- Peter H.C. Hullah Technical Services mailto:Peter.Hullah@eurocontrol.fr EUROCONTROL Experimental Centre Phone: +33 1 69 88 75 49 BP 15, Rue des Bordes, Fax: +33 1 60 85 15 04 91222 BRETIGNY SUR ORGE CEDEX France

Date: Thu, 03 Oct 1996 21:24:47 -0500 From: kuhn@cs.purdue.edu ("Markus G. Kuhn") What is UCT supposed to mean and why is it defined there? I have never heard this term before. Is it supposed to be "Universal Coordinated Time"??? Yes. I don't know where that phrase and abbreviation came from; at first I thought they were typos but they are in actual use. If you look for "Universal Coordinated Time" on the Web in Alta Vista you'll find about 300 hits, as opposed to about 1000 for "Coordinated Universal Time". Perhaps the phrase is an alternative back-formation from the committee-compromise acronym `UTC'. Or perhaps it's the US military; e.g. see <URL:http://tecnet1.jcte.jcs.mil:8000/htdocs/dodinfo/acronyms/u.txt.html>, which mentions both UTC and UCT.

In <199610032320.QAA04986@shade.twinsun.com>, Paul Eggert <eggert@twinsun.com> said:
I also used to believe that UTC was established in 1972, but I've been corrected. UTC was introduced in 1961. It was originally kept close to UT1 by periodically adding or subtracting steps of a fraction of a second. 1972 is when the current leap-second regime was instituted.
Hmmm, so POSIX's epoch *is* well defined then. Do you know if there are any records of when and by how much the various UTC adjustments were made, particularly for the interval 1970-01-01T00:00:00 until the first leap second (1972-06-30T23:59:60)? I'm interested in revisting the issue wollman@uvm-gen.EMBA.UVM.EDU raised in <9402062245.AA18471@bajoran.emba.uvm.edu>:
...According to the bulletins that I've seen, |TAI-UTC| is about 28 seconds now. However, the leapseconds file only lists 19 steps. This is probably due to the fact that the first step was 10 seconds, not just 1. Is there an easy way to fix this, so my users who use NTP don't complain about their clocks being nine seconds off?
[Note to new readers: this is somewhat misleading. The "first step" of 10 seconds was actually the defintion that UTC-TAI would be exactly 10s when the new leap second mechanism was introduced. This was because UT1-TAI was about 10s at the time and UTC had been tracking UT1 and so was therefore also about 10s off of TAI at that time. Any actual stepping (or leaping) involved was of a fraction-of-a-second nature.] Given the "UTC established 1972" misunderstanding at the time, this was considered an awkward problem to address. But it sounds like it may actually be possible to invent some "phantom leap seconds" which are backed up by some version of "truth" in an implementation of the suggestion made by Paul Eggert in <9402072149.AA05650@spot.twinsun.com>:
B. Invent some leap seconds for the period between 1970 and 1972, as if UTC had been in effect then. This lies about UTC but repairs the 2 or 3 s error. The conversion correction would be correspondingly reduced, to 7 or 8 s.
Provided, hat is, that someone can find records of how UTC was kept almost-in-sync with UT1 prior to 1972. --Ken Pizzini (NB: referenced articles are in the tzarchive file on elsie).

I'm not completely convinced by the technical part of your argument. However, since you're the person on the spot, I guess we should follow your advice and use `MSK'/`MSD'. I'll draft a revised patch along these lines. It would help if you could send me your recollection of where these abbreviations came from; I can put them in as comments. For example, you wrote that MSK and MSD have been used for 10 years or more, but they've been in the tz database only for 3 years or so; where were they used before that? From: Andrey A. Chernov <ache@nagual.ru> Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 14:23:10 +0400 (MSD)
I just took a census of Usenet articles on file at twinsun.com that had Moscow time in their `Date:' line, followed by
Usenet RFC 1036 _not_ allows usage of timezone abbreviations except few standard North American timezones The `Date:' lines that I was talking about all had the time zone abbreviations as comments in parentheses, e.g.: Date: Sun, 29 Sep 1996 02:25:38 +0400 (WSU DST) This is allowed by RFC 822 and is recommended by son-of-RFC-1036 (see <URL:ftp://ftp.zoo.toronto.edu/pub/news.txt.Z>). I looked into those WSU DST dates some more and found that they all came from glas.apc.org (e.g. <URL:news:APC&63'0'1dd99a0b'd25@glas.apc.org>); perhaps it's an old gateway. I noticed also, by the way, that `MST' was used for `Moscow summer time' in some English-language reports of preliminary returns in the Russian presidential election; e.g. see <URL:news:APC&63'0'4e79b8c1'8b4@glas.apc.org> (1996-06-17), which you can find by visiting <URL:http://dejanews.com/forms/dnq.html> and searching for `"Moscow summer time" MST' in the Old Usenet database.

I'm not completely convinced by the technical part of your argument.
New names wasn't serious problem from technical part, I see most problems from human resources part. I.e. all changes required to adapt new names are technically simple, but cause bug troubles and confusion to people.
However, since you're the person on the spot, I guess we should follow your advice and use `MSK'/`MSD'. I'll draft a revised patch along these lines.
Thanx!
It would help if you could send me your recollection of where these abbreviations came from; I can put them in as comments. For example, you wrote that MSK and MSD have been used for 10 years or more, but they've been in the tz database only for 3 years or so; where were they used before that?
MSK/MSD was born and used initially on Moscow computers with Unix-like OSes by several developer groups (f.e. Demos group, Kiae group). In those times we don't have any serious connectivity to the rest of the world, so they was used internally. Next step was UUCP network, Relcom predecessor (used mainly for Mail), and MSK/MSD actively used there. Next step was Internet connections which inherits tz conventions from earlier variant.
I looked into those WSU DST dates some more and found that they all came from glas.apc.org (e.g. <URL:news:APC&63'0'1dd99a0b'd25@glas.apc.org>); perhaps it's an old gateway.
WSU is obviously homemade. Don't relay match on Glasnet things, this provider comes here only recently, better look at Relcom postings (most of *.ru, *.su domains without any 'glas' prefix), Relcom is oldest Internet provider here. For Russsian language Usenet you can look at relcom.* hierarchy. Don't expect to find many zones there, because most of world-spreaded Newsreaders don't know anything about Russians. BTW, relcom.* hierarchy can give you more hits because Mail/News gateway still used here. If you'll find some Russian Mail lists archived, it give you more success. I know lists, but don't know any archived. I can send you Date:'s from my home Mail folders, if it can be considered as proof.
I noticed also, by the way, that `MST' was used for `Moscow summer time' in some English-language reports of preliminary returns in the Russian presidential election; e.g. see <URL:news:APC&63'0'4e79b8c1'8b4@glas.apc.org> (1996-06-17), which you can find by visiting <URL:http://dejanews.com/forms/dnq.html> and searching for `"Moscow summer time" MST' in the Old Usenet database.
I also saw MST, but in English enviroment only. -- Andrey A. Chernov <ache@nagual.ru> http://www.nagual.ru/~ache/
participants (6)
-
Ken Pizzini
-
kuhn@cs.purdue.edu
-
Paul Eggert
-
Peter Hullah
-
Robert Elz
-
Андрей Чернов