Hi Following patch fixes various typos: diff --git a/asia b/asia index e26ef1b..7518e0c 100644 --- a/asia +++ b/asia @@ -900,7 +900,7 @@ Zone Asia/Dili 8:22:20 - LMT 1912 Jan 1 # From Paul Eggert (2017-04-20): # Good luck trying to nail down old timekeeping records in India. # "... in the nineteenth century ... Madras Observatory took its magnetic -# measurements in Göttingen time, its meterological measurements on Madras +# measurements in Göttingen time, its metrological measurements on Madras # (local) time, dropped its time ball on Greenwich (ocean navigator's) time, # and distributed civil (local time)." -- Bartky IR. Selling the time: # 19th-century timekeeping in america. Stanford U Press (2000), 247 note 19. @@ -917,7 +917,7 @@ Zone Asia/Dili 8:22:20 - LMT 1912 Jan 1 # # "In 1870 ... Madras time - 'now used by the telegraph and regulated from the # only government observatory' - was suggested as a standard railway time, -# first to be dopted on the Great Indian Peninsular Railway (GIPR).... +# first to be adopted on the Great Indian Peninsular Railway (GIPR).... # Calcutta, Bombay, and Karachi, were to be allowed to continue with their # local time for civil purposes." - Prasad R. Tracks of Change: Railways and # Everyday Life in Colonial India. Cambridge University Press (2016), 145. diff --git a/australasia b/australasia index 6bf0f0a..1e38db7 100644 --- a/australasia +++ b/australasia @@ -1306,7 +1306,7 @@ Zone Pacific/Wallis 12:15:20 - LMT 1901 # http://abc.net.au/news/regionals/neweng/monthly/regeng-22jul1999-1.htm # (1999-07-22). For now, we'll wait to see if this really happens. # -# Victoria will following NSW. See: +# Victoria will follow NSW. See: # Vic to extend daylight saving (1999-07-28) # http://abc.net.au/local/news/olympics/1999/07/item19990728112314_1.htm # diff --git a/backzone b/backzone index 69f6a95..255c4a6 100644 --- a/backzone +++ b/backzone @@ -559,7 +559,7 @@ Zone Europe/Guernsey -0:10:09 - LMT 1913 Jun 18 # Time Act in 1883 and including additional confirmation of some of # the dates of the 'Summer Time' orders originating at # Westminster. There is a little uncertainty as to the starting date -# of the first summer time in 1916 which may have be announced a +# of the first summer time in 1916 which may have been announced a # couple of days late. There is still a substantial number of # documents to work through, but it is thought that every GB change # was also implemented on the island. diff --git a/europe b/europe index 0620db6..8cc55e8 100644 --- a/europe +++ b/europe @@ -2303,7 +2303,7 @@ Zone Europe/Bucharest 1:44:24 - LMT 1891 Oct # http://itar-tass.com/obschestvo/1333711 # http://www.pravo.gov.ru:8080/page.aspx?111660 # http://www.kremlin.ru/acts/46279 -# From October 26, 2014 the new Russian time zone map will looks like this: +# From October 26, 2014 the new Russian time zone map will look like this: # http://www.worldtimezone.com/dst_news/dst_news_russia-map-2014-07.html # From Paul Eggert (2006-03-22): diff --git a/southamerica b/southamerica index 6038c3b..a07da71 100644 --- a/southamerica +++ b/southamerica @@ -1076,7 +1076,7 @@ Zone America/Rio_Branco -4:31:12 - LMT 1914 # the following source, cited by Oscar van Vlijmen (2006-10-08): # [1] Chile Law # http://www.webexhibits.org/daylightsaving/chile.html -# This contains a copy of a this official table: +# This contains a copy of this official table: # Cambios en la hora oficial de Chile desde 1900 (retrieved 2008-03-30) # http://web.archive.org/web/20080330200901/http://www.horaoficial.cl/cambio.h... # [1] needs several corrections, though.
I suspect "meterological" in the first diff hunk should actually read "meteorological", rather than "metrological". —Ice Karma
On 08/20/2017 12:17 AM, Ice Karma (J. Connell) 7¿ wrote:
I suspect "meterological" in the first diff hunk should actually read "meteorological", rather than "metrological".
It seems unlikely that the Madras Observatory was making weather reports. I imagine the author intended to write "astronomical" measurements. However, since it is written as a direct quote the mistake should be left as is, possibly with [sic]?
⬠Ice Karma
On 2017-08-20 06:22, J William Piggott wrote:
On 08/20/2017 12:17 AM, Ice Karma (J. Connell) wrote:
I suspect "meterological" in the first diff hunk should actually read "meteorological", rather than "metrological".
It seems unlikely that the Madras Observatory was making weather reports. I imagine the author intended to write "astronomical" measurements.
However, since it is written as a direct quote the mistake should be left as is, possibly with [sic]?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astronomical_seeing depends on cloud cover, precipitation, temperatures and wind variations up thru the atmospheric layers, so astronomers had to be local amateur meteorologists, before there were professional meteorologists using the telegraph to compile observations, study patterns and systems, draw synoptic maps, and make forecasts, or radiosondes to report observations at multiple altitudes. Navies have been deeply involved in weather, mapping, navigational astronomy, time keeping, and oceanography, and have driven developments across these areas, e.g. the Admiralty/RN and RGO on time and the longitude; USNO, NOAA, and NASA appear to cooperate closely and even overlap in some areas. -- Take care. Thanks, Brian Inglis, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
On 2017-08-20 06:22, J William Piggott wrote:
On 08/20/2017 12:17 AM, Ice Karma (J. Connell) wrote:
I suspect "meterological" in the first diff hunk should actually read "meteorological", rather than "metrological".
It seems unlikely that the Madras Observatory was making weather reports. I imagine the author intended to write "astronomical" measurements.
However, since it is written as a direct quote the mistake should be left as is, possibly with [sic]?
No, the mistake was in the quote (as first shown), not in the original. You can find the original via Google, it's in Google Books and it says "meteorological". (Which makes sense; while "metrological" is a valid word, it's not the one that fits here.) paul
On Aug 20, 2017, at 8:22 AM, J William Piggott <elseifthen@gmx.com> wrote:
On 08/20/2017 12:17 AM, Ice Karma (J. Connell) 7¿ wrote:
I suspect "meterological" in the first diff hunk should actually read "meteorological", rather than "metrological".
It seems unlikely that the Madras Observatory was making weather reports. I imagine the author intended to write "astronomical" measurements.
However, since it is written as a direct quote the mistake should be left as is, possibly with [sic]?
"Metrological" is a word; it means "relating to precise measurement". For example, the official journal of the Internal Standards Bureau (BIPM) is "Metrologia". And my father's professional specialty was metrology. When speaking of astronomical observatories making measurements relating to time, "metrological" definitely fits. No [sic] is called for here. paul
participants (6)
-
Brian Inglis -
Dominique Pellé -
Ice Karma (J. Connell) 「氷宿縁」 -
J William Piggott -
Paul Eggert -
Paul.Koning＠dell.com