Hello What do I need to do for you to make such changes? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KyivNotKiev Are such changes possible? Original: Вітаю Що я повинен зробити, щоб ви зробили подібні зміни? https://uk.wikipedia.org/wiki/KyivNotKiev Такі зміни можливі?
On 26/11/2020 11:27, Andriy Ivanchenko wrote:
What do I need to do for you to make such changes?
Stop using timezone id tags as if they are names to be displayed to third party users. The chicken and egg problem that has to be fixed is that the id tags are ONLY intended to be used to access the data and other databases use that tag to call up timezone rules but any display to the end user SHOULD be provided WITHOUT reference to the id tags. It is now getting to the point when perhaps the request to strip all 'english' tags and replace them with numeric id's, but that is an even bigger BC break than simply using old established keys internally in the TZ database! While software programs cut corners by using the internal id tags as if they are accurate location information we will have this continuous request to keep changing names that SHOULD be handled at the client interface level. -- Lester Caine - G8HFL ----------------------------- Contact - https://lsces.uk/wiki/Contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - https://lsces.uk Model Engineers Digital Workshop - https://medw.uk Rainbow Digital Media - https://rainbowdigitalmedia.uk
A thought came to mind after reading similar emails for a few years. Perhaps a minor change should be made to the spec. Perhaps it should say that the zone 'tag' is the 'tag' given to the zone 'as would be in common usage in American English in 1980'. The last portion will ensure that newer spellings in English should no longer be expected to be supported. On 2020-11-26 06:57, Lester Caine wrote
Stop using timezone id tags as if they are names to be displayed to third party users. The chicken and egg problem that has to be fixed is that the id tags are ONLY intended to be used to access the data and other databases use that tag to call up timezone rules but any display to the end user SHOULD be provided WITHOUT reference to the id tags. It is now getting to the point when perhaps the request to strip all 'english' tags and replace them with numeric id's, but that is an even bigger BC break than simply using old established keys internally in the TZ database!
While software programs cut corners by using the internal id tags as if they are accurate location information we will have this continuous request to keep changing names that SHOULD be handled at the client interface level.
Or maybe 'as would be in common usage in American English at the time the tag was created' -----Original Message----- From: tz <tz-bounces@iana.org> On Behalf Of David Patte Sent: 26 November 2020 13:06 To: tz@iana.org Subject: Re: [tz] KyivNotKiev A thought came to mind after reading similar emails for a few years. Perhaps a minor change should be made to the spec. Perhaps it should say that the zone 'tag' is the 'tag' given to the zone 'as would be in common usage in American English in 1980'. The last portion will ensure that newer spellings in English should no longer be expected to be supported. On 2020-11-26 06:57, Lester Caine wrote
Stop using timezone id tags as if they are names to be displayed to third party users. The chicken and egg problem that has to be fixed is that the id tags are ONLY intended to be used to access the data and other databases use that tag to call up timezone rules but any display to the end user SHOULD be provided WITHOUT reference to the id tags. It is now getting to the point when perhaps the request to strip all 'english' tags and replace them with numeric id's, but that is an even bigger BC break than simply using old established keys internally in the TZ database!
While software programs cut corners by using the internal id tags as if they are accurate location information we will have this continuous request to keep changing names that SHOULD be handled at the client interface level.
MAJOR CHANGE: It's interesting to me how badly we are, as a group, at having these discussions. We do not do a good job of introducing new people to the way we think about these issues, and we do not do a good job of assessing whether the ground under our feet has changed (it has!) What Andriy's email did not explain is the rather significant change: On Sept. 16, 2020, Wikipedia finally decided that the time had come and moved its page from Kiev to Kyiv. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Kyiv/Archive_7#Requested_move_28_August_2... It was summarized with: | Rough consensus that "Kyiv" is the better title given usage in | reliable, English-language sources. An extended summary/rationale | prefaces the discussion. — Wug·a·po·des 06:58, 16 September 2020 | (UTC) That decision was positively reviewed week later at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Move_review/Log/2020_September (you have to click the "show" button). I'm not an expert in Wikipedia's decision-making processes, but I will say that about a year ago (Oct. 3, 2019), I made this prediction: "Because of its...unique project management challenges, I expect Wikipedia will probably be the last thing to switch. (cf. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Kiev/naming/Archive_14#The_time_has_come:...). I don't think we should wait that long." Turns out I was wrong, Wikipedia switched before tz. Wikipedia, also, instituted a moratorium on these discussions; the last one was a year long, and so that's why this one come a year following our previous substantive discussion, after the Associated Press and the Wall Street Journal made changes. So, it is probably time for us to take another look. I continue to support the change, and I think the objections offered are really just excuses. We wouldn't excuse an American racist anachronism in our database in the same way; perhaps this is not appropriately comparable, but I think it is not wrong to ask the question as to whether it is. Specific comments: Andriy: The tz project has long been aware of this issue, and the project leaders have felt that the English-language concensus remained Kiev, although they were aware of the clear preference of the Ukranian government and citizenry. So the question now is whether the English-language concensus has changed. It's clear that we should be looking at that once again. Lester Caine: No one with a straight face can pretend that timezone identifiers are opauqe tags right now. And I think very few people could see a way to a transition where they are. In part because US-English-centered developers like working with the names as they are, and change is hard and frustrating and often counterproductive. David Patte: Enshrining offensive anachronisms by changing our standard to be "if we made a mistake, we will never fix it" is politically unpalatable in almost every part of the world. I would find it politically unpalatable here. We are concerned about churn and "opening the floodgates" so we have made it hard to make changes, for good reason, but a system that is impossible to change is no good either. I do think it's clear that the major English-language authorities have all switched to Kyiv. If our process is going to be to claim that we need to wait for the majority of written words to change over (e.g. based on Google search results, N-grams, etc.), I think we are setting an unreasonably high and unattainable target. Kyiv has marshalled a political campaign to make this happen throughout the world in a way that it's difficult to imagine any other city doing, and it's very hard for me to see why we should substitute our judgement for that of all the authorities, be they formal political ones or simply major news sources and style guides. If this is not enough, what would ever be? -- jhawk@alum.mit.edu John Hawkinson
On 2020-11-26 14:06, John Hawkinson wrote:
On Sept. 16, 2020, Wikipedia finally decided that the time had come and moved its page from Kiev to Kyiv. Seehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Kyiv/Archive_7#Requested_move_28_August_2... It was summarized with:
| Rough consensus that "Kyiv" is the better title given usage in | reliable, English-language sources. An extended summary/rationale | prefaces the discussion. — Wug·a·po·des 06:58, 16 September 2020 | (UTC)
Current occurrence counts are "Kiev": 135e+6 "Kyiv": 48e+6 so that the frequencies of the two spellings are indeed not far apart. The file theory.html suggests a switch in case of "long-time widespread use of the new city name instead of the old". I think that this is consistent with waiting for a majority for Kyiv. My spelling checker knows "Kiev" but not "Kyiv". Michael Deckers.
I want to take this opportunity to respond to multiple messages; replies all in-line below. Andriy Ivanchenko <ivanchenko.andriy@gmail.com> wrote on Fri, 27 Nov 2020 at 06:39:51 EST in <CADS=uUsREjp3QAA0e1dky8oXN9QV6zqJx7xM3FWgBFN_KkEq3A@mail.gmail.com>:
I understand correctly that you do not plan to change Kiev to Kyiv? Do I still have to wait a while for the final decision?
You do need to wait, but as you have seen, there is considerable opposition. The reason is that issue has come up many many times since at least 2007, and the consensus has been that Kyiv is insufficiently common in English to warrant making the change. As a result, when you made the request without making it very clear that there is a strong argument that there is new information, you received a lot of knee-jerk reactions from people on the list who have not carefully considered any new information, and also are quite used to and comfortable with the decisions made and repeatedly endorsed in the past 13 years. But the ultimate decision will come from the project's maintainers, who assess concensus and come to a decision. So it's particularly important what Paul Eggert and Tim Parenti think -- they will ultimately make the decision, in consultation with the members of this mailing list. I hope this lengthy message does not get lost in the frey.
I don't understand how your system works. Can you write about it in more detail?
You've received a bunch of replies, but it may be helpful for you to take a look at the mailing list archives. This Google search shows the approx. 120 messages on this topic from the past: https://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Amm.icann.org%2Fpipermail%2Ftz%2F+kyiv Alan Perry <alanp@snowmoose.com> wrote on Thu, 26 Nov 2020 at 11:44:05 EST in <16E4CCFC-80B0-4A69-B1DD-4727B8C2BFA2@snowmoose.com>:
As a Wikipedia editor, I think Mr. Hawkinson should spend some time participating in the Wikipedia decision making process before trying to take in characterizing its inertia against change to others.
I was fairly uncomfortable with the tone of this message and wrote Alan Perry about it privately. But I want to remind all of us to speak to the issue, not to the person, where we can do so. (It turns out I have spent considerable time with Wikipedia's processes.)
I also question his claim that “major English-language authorities have all switched to Kyiv” without listing them. The English language doesn’t have official authorities, what constitutes a major English-language authority is subjective.
It is absolutely subjective, and I don't mean to suggest there are "official" authorities as there are in French. But it remains the case that there are unofficial authorities, and they have strong persuasive value for many speakers of English. I linked to the Wikipedia discussion because I thought it was pretty fulsome, but perhaps I should have copied some of it here, because people do not follow links. The following comes from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Kyiv/Archive_7#Requested_move_28_August_2... (I've hard-wrapped this to 70 columns, which I hope is not a mistake; see the URL if the formatting is bad for you): | Original move request 1 July 2020: Kiev → Kyiv – Since October 2019 | when the 9 months ban/moratorium on requesting to change the name of | the article from Kiev to Kyiv was established, the following updates | have happened (per Atlantic Council's article from October 21, 2019 | entitled Kyiv not Kiev: Why spelling matters in Ukraine’s quest for | an independent identity, ""A number of global heavyweights have | recently adopted the Ukrainian-language derived 'Kyiv' as their | official spelling for the country’s capital city, replacing the | Russian-rooted 'Kiev'""). Specifically, a couple of changes have | happened: | 1) all major English publications that used their own stylebook have | made updates to their styleguides and now use Kyiv spelling, | 2) all major English publications that use standard stylebooks | (e.g., Associated Press Stylebook or Canadian Press Stylebook) are | now following recent updates in those styleguides and are now using | Kyiv, | 3) IATA has switched to Kyiv and therefore all international | airports have updated their English spelling to Kyiv, | 4) BGN has switched to Kyiv and, therefore, all major geographical | bodies followed suite and are now using Kyiv and, lastly, | 5) The Library of Congress has switched to Kyiv and, therefore, all | major library organizations followed suite and are now using Kyiv. | | Below is a selection of a few of those major updates: | bne IntelliNews: January 2006. Official quote from bne | IntelliNews: "bne IntelliNews has been using Kyiv since it was | founded in 2006" (source: | https://www.intellinews.com/more-publications-switch-from-kiev-to-kyiv-and-i... | ; archived-source: http://archive.is/ZQEHD) | | CBC: January 2011 (previously Kyiv was also used by CBC from | 1999 to 2004). Official quote from CBC: "CBC News adopted the | spelling Kyiv for the city in 2011". (source: | https://www.cbc.ca/news2/indepth/words/kiev-or-kyiv.html , | archived-source: http://archive.is/kpvo0 | | Canadian Press: January 2018. Official quote from the Canadian | Press Stylebook 18th edition: "The Canadian Press stylebook adopts | the Ukrainian rather than the Russian spelling of Ukrainian capital: | Kyiv" source: | https://www.thecanadianpress.com/writing-guides/the-canadian-press-stylebook... | | Toronto Star: January 2018. Official quote from the Toronto | Star: "We [at Toronto Star] follow The Canadian Press style (which | adopts the Ukrainian rather than the Russian spelling). It’s Kyiv." | source: | https://www.thestar.com/trust/2018/01/26/the-stars-style-committee-on-the-im... | ; archived-source: http://archive.is/d50oE | | The Guardian, 13 February 2019, Official quote from The | Guardian: "From February 13 the capital of Ukraine will be written | as Kyiv at The Guardian". (source @The Guardian styleguide: | https://www.theguardian.com/guardian-observer-style-guide-k ; | archived-source @The Guardian styleguide: http://archive.is/r5OpE | | The Calvert Journal 2 April, 2019 Official quote from The | Calvert Journal: "We have decided the time is right to change to | Kyiv" (source: | https://www.calvertjournal.com/articles/show/11100/kiev-kyiv-what-to-call-uk... | , archived-source: http://archive.is/hq4xW | | BGN (regulates what spelling is used for geographic names in | maps) June 17, 2019. Official quote from BGN: "At its 398th meeting | on June 11, 2019, the Foreign Names Committee of the United States | Board on Geographic Names (BGN) voted unanimously to retire the | spelling “Kiev” as a BGN Conventional name for the capital of | Ukraine. The spelling “Kyiv” has been the BGN Approved name since | 2006, and is now the only name available for standard use within the | United States (U.S.) Government, per the authority of the BGN | (source on BGN: | http://geonames.nga.mil/gns/html/PDFDocs/BGNStatement_Kyiv.pdf, | archived-source: http://archive.is/pLZlO | | Associated Press: 14 August, 2019. Official quote from AP: "We | are making a significant change in our style for the Ukrainian | capital city Kiev. It will henceforth be written in text, captions | and datelines as Kyiv." (source on AP: | https://blog.ap.org/announcements/an-update-on-ap-style-on-kyiv , | archived-source: http://archive.is/ONA0S | | The Library of Congress: 12 September, 2019. Official quote from | LOC: "In accordance with LC-PCC PS for 16.2.2.5, we have applied the | ALA/LC Romanization Table for Ukrainian in the new authorized access | point rather than using a form that reflects another romanization | scheme. This form is “Kyïv (Ukraine)." (source on lOC | (announcement): | https://listserv.loc.gov/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind1909&L=PCCLIST&P=20135, | archived-source: http://archive.is/XlarP ; source on LOC (entry): | http://id.loc.gov/authorities/names/n81022031.html , | archived-source: http://archive.is/BzK0T | | NPR: September 23, 2019. Official quote from NPR: "Guidance: The | Capital Of Ukraine Is Spelled 'Kyiv'" (source on NPR: | https://www.npr.org/sections/memmos/2019/09/23/763509886/guidance-the-capita..., | archived-source: http://archive.is/Lx7Ch | | The Wall Street Journal: October 3, 2019. Official quote from | WSJ: "After careful consideration, we have joined Associated Press | and Webster’s New World College Dictionary (5th) in using the | spelling Kyiv for the capital of Ukraine" (source on WSJ: | https://blogs.wsj.com/styleandsubstance/2019/10/03/vol-32-no-9-kyiv/, | archived-source: http://archive.is/wip/yk3Eh | | The Globe and Mail: October 10, 2019. Official quote from The | Globe and Mail: "The Globe is changing its style on the capital of | Ukraine from the Russian-derived "Kiev" to "Kyiv," the | transliteration the Ukrainian government uses" (source The Globe and | Mail's correspondent Adrian Morrow: | https://twitter.com/adrianmorrow/status/1182340357255831552, | archived-source: http://archive.is/cLGGZ | | BBC: October 14, 2019. Official quote from BBC: "From today, BBC | News will be changing its spelling of the Ukrainian capital from | #Kiev to #Kyiv, bringing us in line with the many international | organizations, government agencies, international aviation industry | members and media who’ve adopted this spelling." (source on BBC News | Press Team @Twitter: | https://twitter.com/bbcnewspr/status/1183707458642108416, | archive-source: http://archive.is/PGhmq; source on BBC News | Ukrainian: https://www.bbc.com/ukrainian/news-49999939 , | archived-source: http://archive.is/ap1vS ; source on BBC Style | Guide: | https://www.bbc.co.uk/academy/en/articles/art20130702112133577, | archived-source: http://archive.vn/SD07M | | The Washington Post: October 2019. Official quote from TWP: "The | Washington Post changes its style guide for the capital of Ukraine, | which henceforth will be Kyiv, and not Kiev. This change is | effective immediately. These changes are in accordance with the way | Ukrainian capital is spelled by Ukrainian institutions, as well by | by other media organizations." (source from WP's correspondent Adam | Taylor's Twitter: | https://twitter.com/mradamtaylor/status/1184470206925676544 , | archived-source from WP's correspondent Adam Taylor's Twitter: | http://archive.is/yFzVy; source on Voice of America: | https://ukrainian.voanews.com/a/kyiv-not-kiev/5126392.html, | source-archived: http://archive.is/nL48F ; source on The Washington | Post: | https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/starting-in-the-1970s-womens-first-name... | , archived-source: http://archive.is/ZrUos ) | | The Economist, October, 29 2019. Official quote from The | Economist: "Kyiv spelling is now used at The Economist for Ukraine's | capital" (source news about this on Ukrinform: | https://www.ukrinform.net/rubric-society/2808601-the-economist-starts-using-... | , archived-source: http://archive.is/ka7Lv | | Financial Times, October, 29 2019. Official quote from Financial | Times: "Kyiv spelling is now used at Financial Times for Ukraine's | capital" (source news about this on Ukrinform: | https://www.ukrinform.ua/rubric-kyiv/2808219-financial-times-vidteper-pisati... | , archived-source: http://archive.is/wip/kh5YL | | IATA (regulates what spelling is used for geographic names in | airports): October, 2019. (source: list of all cities worldwide at | iata.org: | https://www.iata.org/contentassets/5989fc2df9824de3826cccfd279f9409/slot-all... | ) | | The New York Times: November 18, 2019. Official quote from NYT: | "Note: Days after this article was published, The New York Times | changed its style of spelling for the capital of Ukraine to Kyiv, | reflecting the transliteration from Ukrainian, rather than | Russian. The change is reflected in articles published after | Nov. 18. " (source from NYT's correspondent Andrew E. Kramer's | Twitter: | https://twitter.com/AndrewKramerNYT/status/1196496095184084997, | archived-source from NYT's correspondent Andrew E. Kramer's Twitter: | http://archive.is/wip/3Xqgm; source: | https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/13/us/politics/kiev-pronunciation.html | , archived-source: http://archive.is/KjrWw | | BuzzFeed: December 31, 2019. Official quote from BuzzFeed: "We | updated our style to “Kyiv” to refer to Ukraine’s capital city. The | “Kiev” spelling is transliterated from the Russian language, while | "Kyiv" is from Ukrainian." (source on BuzzFeed Styleguide @Twitter: | https://twitter.com/styleguide/status/1212079459282685954 , | archived-source: http://archive.is/wip/0I4rB ; BuzzFeed Styleguide: | https://www.buzzfeed.com/emmyf/buzzfeed-style-guide ; | archived-source BuzzFeed Styleguide: http://archive.is/G2Y13 | | Reuters, June 12, 2020. Official quote from Reuters: "From June | 15 the capital of Ukraine will be written as Kyiv at | @Reuters". (source Reuters' journalist Tommy Lund @Twitter: | https://twitter.com/tommylundn/status/1271344841243471872, | archived-source: http://archive.is/UqgwX; source @Reuters | styleguide: | http://handbook.reuters.com/index.php?title=K#Kyiv.2C_not_Kiev ; | archived-source @Reuters styleguide: http://archive.is/QZyqw | | Facebook, June 26, 2020. Official quote from Facebook: "After | reviewing, we switched to using the page “Kyiv” to represent this | region". (source: Minister of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine (MFA of | Ukraine) Dmytro Kuleba and MFA of Ukraine page CorrectUA, | archived-source: http://archive.is/XKXoz --73.75.115.5 (talk) — | 73.75.115.5 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this | topic. 04:22, 1 July 2020 (UTC) —Relisting. ProcrastinatingReader | (talk) 18:46, 28 August 2020 (UTC) —Relisting. Steel1943 (talk) | 17:45, 9 September 2020 (UTC) Further, beyond that list, there is also an even more comprehensive list at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Kyiv/sources .
As far as this group, I am not sure what the WSJ or AP does is particularly relevant. However, I think the decisions of English-language naming authorities, like the USGS Board on Geographical Names, and international authorities that designate things in English, like IATA and ICAO, are more relevant and they have gone to using Kyiv as the primary name. What are similar governmental and international authorities doing on this?
I don't know what are examples of "similar" authorities are; can you offer some? I do think, however, that what we are trying to do is measure cultural change among English speakers, and that is a hard thing to do. I think what major English-language publications choose to do is probably a much better indicator of cultural change than what an international trade association of airlines chooses to do, so I think the WSJ+AP+NYT examples (all of which were present when we last discussed this over a year ago) are far more compelling and persuasive. Michael H Deckers <michael.h.deckers@googlemail.com> wrote on Thu, 26 Nov 2020 at 11:15:14 EST in <9e430fe2-4389-7539-bf60-6b2a9a48ba74@googlemail.com>:
Current occurrence counts are "Kiev": 135e+6 "Kyiv": 48e+6 so that the frequencies of the two spellings are indeed not far apart.
Although I do not think the numbers tell the full story, and generally speaking that they are not helpful for answering the question of whether we should switch when a change is made (as opposed to what spelling we should choose for a new identifier if a new time zone rule were needed), my understanding is that it's important to be pretty careful how you do these queries. For instance, it's generally judged necessary to exclude both "Chicken Kiev" (recipe) and "Dynamo Kyiv" (a football club) because both are effectively proper nouns that skew the results. But also that what you get back from Google depends on where you are in the world, and other factors. And here, on this list, we should be clear about what these are. Are these Google search results from some particular location, and are they the estimates from the first page of results, or the more accurate counts from the final. It may be more convincing to take a look at the Google Trends plot ("interest over time") linked from the Wikipedia sources page: https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?q=kiev,kyiv It shows several crossovers recently with a projected line of Kyiv exceeding Kiev.
I think that this is consistent with waiting for a majority for Kyiv. My spelling checker knows "Kiev" but not "Kyiv".
This is an interesting point, to talk about dictionaries. Many of them are descriptive rather than prescriptive and often lag spoken and written language by years, sometimes by decades or scores of decades. And for computer word lists, there may be no practical method for updating them short of a massive operating system upgrade. If I looked at my system, I shudder to think of the age of /usr/share/dict/words (which has neither, ha!), or even the ancient version of Microsoft Word. I'd suggest dictionaries give us a very long time-constant view of these issue and that a time-constant measured in decades is probably not the right authority for our project to make this decision, but of course reasonable people can disagree! But, of course, in practice, spelling of proper nouns in computer spell-checkers is not a big deal. Michael H Deckers via tz <tz@iana.org> wrote on Fri, 27 Nov 2020 at 07:15:08 EST in <b5b423dc-2a65-6bb9-3b23-a0df8dc8f9b2@googlemail.com>: ...
It will take some time until "Kyiv" becomes the mainstream English spelling -- one problem with it is that it is not clear how it should be pronounced.
I'm not quite sure why pronunciation matters to us. I'll note, however, that there is considerable concern over the proper pronunciation of the city, and my understanding is that the obvious and common pronunciation of "Kiev" is regarded as incorrect. Consequently, if "Kyiv" introduces a little bit of friction on how to pronounce, that may in fact be a good thing and helpful in making English speakers question their pronunciation when it is worth questioning.
What I find surprising is that this issue comes up so often. I hope it is not a political issue with which tzdb should not be involved.
I'm not entirely sure what you mean, and I don't think this sort of ambiguous comment is helpful. Are you likening it to a situation where there are two warring groups who favor opposing spellings and the change has come about because one group has risen to power over the other, and our accepting the change would be like taking sides in a civil war, especially one that could change again quickly? I think this becomes a very difficult question to analyze, because the differentiating {a conflict between two sides in a civil war} from {a decades-long conflict between two adjacent nations of unequal size and resources where one has a history of expansionism} may be more challenging than expected. I think we can say with confidence that absent a major geopolitical shift, the current preference for Kyiv is very unlikely to change. Jacob Pratt <jacob@jhpratt.dev> wrote on Fri, 27 Nov 2020 at 04:43:28 EST in <CAHbUps4dhgAMB918ggzLaRTxEw5=2TS2kiOmscme7nP38dvtoQ@mail.gmail.com>:
As has been stated by others, the listing should not be taken as something to be displayed. The use of Kiev over Kyiv is well established in the tz database. The fact that programmers do not use the CLDR as intended is not the fault of the maintainers of the tz database.
The last is...not a fair claim. The tz database came long before CLDR and a time when Unix was centered on US English. It is not correct to say that the tz maintainers have had no responsibility for the way in which internationalization has occurred. We chose to use the identifier in the file system, and also to ignore the issue for a long time, and then to leverage CLDR for internationalization, rather than integrating such issues more tightly. This is not to say our choices were not reasonable or justified, but they were nonetheless our choices that contributed to the situation ("fault"). -- jhawk@alum.mit.edu John Hawkinson
Thanks for your answers. I didn't know I wasn't the first. But I am convinced that I will not be the last. Therefore, I advise you to prepare automatic answers. I hope that you will still change the name to Kyiv. пт, 27 лист. 2020 о 15:42 John Hawkinson <jhawk@alum.mit.edu> пише:
I want to take this opportunity to respond to multiple messages; replies all in-line below.
Andriy Ivanchenko <ivanchenko.andriy@gmail.com> wrote on Fri, 27 Nov 2020 at 06:39:51 EST in <CADS= uUsREjp3QAA0e1dky8oXN9QV6zqJx7xM3FWgBFN_KkEq3A@mail.gmail.com>:
I understand correctly that you do not plan to change Kiev to Kyiv? Do I still have to wait a while for the final decision?
You do need to wait, but as you have seen, there is considerable opposition.
The reason is that issue has come up many many times since at least 2007, and the consensus has been that Kyiv is insufficiently common in English to warrant making the change. As a result, when you made the request without making it very clear that there is a strong argument that there is new information, you received a lot of knee-jerk reactions from people on the list who have not carefully considered any new information, and also are quite used to and comfortable with the decisions made and repeatedly endorsed in the past 13 years.
But the ultimate decision will come from the project's maintainers, who assess concensus and come to a decision. So it's particularly important what Paul Eggert and Tim Parenti think -- they will ultimately make the decision, in consultation with the members of this mailing list. I hope this lengthy message does not get lost in the frey.
I don't understand how your system works. Can you write about it in more detail?
You've received a bunch of replies, but it may be helpful for you to take a look at the mailing list archives. This Google search shows the approx. 120 messages on this topic from the past: https://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Amm.icann.org%2Fpipermail%2Ftz%2F+kyiv
Alan Perry <alanp@snowmoose.com> wrote on Thu, 26 Nov 2020 at 11:44:05 EST in <16E4CCFC-80B0-4A69-B1DD-4727B8C2BFA2@snowmoose.com>:
As a Wikipedia editor, I think Mr. Hawkinson should spend some time participating in the Wikipedia decision making process before trying to take in characterizing its inertia against change to others.
I was fairly uncomfortable with the tone of this message and wrote Alan Perry about it privately. But I want to remind all of us to speak to the issue, not to the person, where we can do so. (It turns out I have spent considerable time with Wikipedia's processes.)
I also question his claim that “major English-language authorities have all switched to Kyiv” without listing them. The English language doesn’t have official authorities, what constitutes a major English-language authority is subjective.
It is absolutely subjective, and I don't mean to suggest there are "official" authorities as there are in French. But it remains the case that there are unofficial authorities, and they have strong persuasive value for many speakers of English.
I linked to the Wikipedia discussion because I thought it was pretty fulsome, but perhaps I should have copied some of it here, because people do not follow links. The following comes from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Kyiv/Archive_7#Requested_move_28_August_2... (I've hard-wrapped this to 70 columns, which I hope is not a mistake; see the URL if the formatting is bad for you):
| Original move request 1 July 2020: Kiev → Kyiv – Since October 2019 | when the 9 months ban/moratorium on requesting to change the name of | the article from Kiev to Kyiv was established, the following updates | have happened (per Atlantic Council's article from October 21, 2019 | entitled Kyiv not Kiev: Why spelling matters in Ukraine’s quest for | an independent identity, ""A number of global heavyweights have | recently adopted the Ukrainian-language derived 'Kyiv' as their | official spelling for the country’s capital city, replacing the | Russian-rooted 'Kiev'""). Specifically, a couple of changes have | happened: | 1) all major English publications that used their own stylebook have | made updates to their styleguides and now use Kyiv spelling, | 2) all major English publications that use standard stylebooks | (e.g., Associated Press Stylebook or Canadian Press Stylebook) are | now following recent updates in those styleguides and are now using | Kyiv, | 3) IATA has switched to Kyiv and therefore all international | airports have updated their English spelling to Kyiv, | 4) BGN has switched to Kyiv and, therefore, all major geographical | bodies followed suite and are now using Kyiv and, lastly, | 5) The Library of Congress has switched to Kyiv and, therefore, all | major library organizations followed suite and are now using Kyiv. | | Below is a selection of a few of those major updates: | bne IntelliNews: January 2006. Official quote from bne | IntelliNews: "bne IntelliNews has been using Kyiv since it was | founded in 2006" (source: | https://www.intellinews.com/more-publications-switch-from-kiev-to-kyiv-and-i... | ; archived-source: http://archive.is/ZQEHD) | | CBC: January 2011 (previously Kyiv was also used by CBC from | 1999 to 2004). Official quote from CBC: "CBC News adopted the | spelling Kyiv for the city in 2011". (source: | https://www.cbc.ca/news2/indepth/words/kiev-or-kyiv.html , | archived-source: http://archive.is/kpvo0 | | Canadian Press: January 2018. Official quote from the Canadian | Press Stylebook 18th edition: "The Canadian Press stylebook adopts | the Ukrainian rather than the Russian spelling of Ukrainian capital: | Kyiv" source: | https://www.thecanadianpress.com/writing-guides/the-canadian-press-stylebook... | | Toronto Star: January 2018. Official quote from the Toronto | Star: "We [at Toronto Star] follow The Canadian Press style (which | adopts the Ukrainian rather than the Russian spelling). It’s Kyiv." | source: | https://www.thestar.com/trust/2018/01/26/the-stars-style-committee-on-the-im... | ; archived-source: http://archive.is/d50oE | | The Guardian, 13 February 2019, Official quote from The | Guardian: "From February 13 the capital of Ukraine will be written | as Kyiv at The Guardian". (source @The Guardian styleguide: | https://www.theguardian.com/guardian-observer-style-guide-k ; | archived-source @The Guardian styleguide: http://archive.is/r5OpE | | The Calvert Journal 2 April, 2019 Official quote from The | Calvert Journal: "We have decided the time is right to change to | Kyiv" (source: | https://www.calvertjournal.com/articles/show/11100/kiev-kyiv-what-to-call-uk... | , archived-source: http://archive.is/hq4xW | | BGN (regulates what spelling is used for geographic names in | maps) June 17, 2019. Official quote from BGN: "At its 398th meeting | on June 11, 2019, the Foreign Names Committee of the United States | Board on Geographic Names (BGN) voted unanimously to retire the | spelling “Kiev” as a BGN Conventional name for the capital of | Ukraine. The spelling “Kyiv” has been the BGN Approved name since | 2006, and is now the only name available for standard use within the | United States (U.S.) Government, per the authority of the BGN | (source on BGN: | http://geonames.nga.mil/gns/html/PDFDocs/BGNStatement_Kyiv.pdf, | archived-source: http://archive.is/pLZlO | | Associated Press: 14 August, 2019. Official quote from AP: "We | are making a significant change in our style for the Ukrainian | capital city Kiev. It will henceforth be written in text, captions | and datelines as Kyiv." (source on AP: | https://blog.ap.org/announcements/an-update-on-ap-style-on-kyiv , | archived-source: http://archive.is/ONA0S | | The Library of Congress: 12 September, 2019. Official quote from | LOC: "In accordance with LC-PCC PS for 16.2.2.5, we have applied the | ALA/LC Romanization Table for Ukrainian in the new authorized access | point rather than using a form that reflects another romanization | scheme. This form is “Kyïv (Ukraine)." (source on lOC | (announcement): | https://listserv.loc.gov/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind1909&L=PCCLIST&P=20135, | archived-source: http://archive.is/XlarP ; source on LOC (entry): | http://id.loc.gov/authorities/names/n81022031.html , | archived-source: http://archive.is/BzK0T | | NPR: September 23, 2019. Official quote from NPR: "Guidance: The | Capital Of Ukraine Is Spelled 'Kyiv'" (source on NPR: | https://www.npr.org/sections/memmos/2019/09/23/763509886/guidance-the-capita... , | archived-source: http://archive.is/Lx7Ch | | The Wall Street Journal: October 3, 2019. Official quote from | WSJ: "After careful consideration, we have joined Associated Press | and Webster’s New World College Dictionary (5th) in using the | spelling Kyiv for the capital of Ukraine" (source on WSJ: | https://blogs.wsj.com/styleandsubstance/2019/10/03/vol-32-no-9-kyiv/, | archived-source: http://archive.is/wip/yk3Eh | | The Globe and Mail: October 10, 2019. Official quote from The | Globe and Mail: "The Globe is changing its style on the capital of | Ukraine from the Russian-derived "Kiev" to "Kyiv," the | transliteration the Ukrainian government uses" (source The Globe and | Mail's correspondent Adrian Morrow: | https://twitter.com/adrianmorrow/status/1182340357255831552, | archived-source: http://archive.is/cLGGZ | | BBC: October 14, 2019. Official quote from BBC: "From today, BBC | News will be changing its spelling of the Ukrainian capital from | #Kiev to #Kyiv, bringing us in line with the many international | organizations, government agencies, international aviation industry | members and media who’ve adopted this spelling." (source on BBC News | Press Team @Twitter: | https://twitter.com/bbcnewspr/status/1183707458642108416, | archive-source: http://archive.is/PGhmq; source on BBC News | Ukrainian: https://www.bbc.com/ukrainian/news-49999939 , | archived-source: http://archive.is/ap1vS ; source on BBC Style | Guide: | https://www.bbc.co.uk/academy/en/articles/art20130702112133577, | archived-source: http://archive.vn/SD07M | | The Washington Post: October 2019. Official quote from TWP: "The | Washington Post changes its style guide for the capital of Ukraine, | which henceforth will be Kyiv, and not Kiev. This change is | effective immediately. These changes are in accordance with the way | Ukrainian capital is spelled by Ukrainian institutions, as well by | by other media organizations." (source from WP's correspondent Adam | Taylor's Twitter: | https://twitter.com/mradamtaylor/status/1184470206925676544 , | archived-source from WP's correspondent Adam Taylor's Twitter: | http://archive.is/yFzVy; source on Voice of America: | https://ukrainian.voanews.com/a/kyiv-not-kiev/5126392.html, | source-archived: http://archive.is/nL48F ; source on The Washington | Post: | https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/starting-in-the-1970s-womens-first-name... | , archived-source: http://archive.is/ZrUos ) | | The Economist, October, 29 2019. Official quote from The | Economist: "Kyiv spelling is now used at The Economist for Ukraine's | capital" (source news about this on Ukrinform: | https://www.ukrinform.net/rubric-society/2808601-the-economist-starts-using-... | , archived-source: http://archive.is/ka7Lv | | Financial Times, October, 29 2019. Official quote from Financial | Times: "Kyiv spelling is now used at Financial Times for Ukraine's | capital" (source news about this on Ukrinform: | https://www.ukrinform.ua/rubric-kyiv/2808219-financial-times-vidteper-pisati... | , archived-source: http://archive.is/wip/kh5YL | | IATA (regulates what spelling is used for geographic names in | airports): October, 2019. (source: list of all cities worldwide at | iata.org: | https://www.iata.org/contentassets/5989fc2df9824de3826cccfd279f9409/slot-all... | ) | | The New York Times: November 18, 2019. Official quote from NYT: | "Note: Days after this article was published, The New York Times | changed its style of spelling for the capital of Ukraine to Kyiv, | reflecting the transliteration from Ukrainian, rather than | Russian. The change is reflected in articles published after | Nov. 18. " (source from NYT's correspondent Andrew E. Kramer's | Twitter: | https://twitter.com/AndrewKramerNYT/status/1196496095184084997, | archived-source from NYT's correspondent Andrew E. Kramer's Twitter: | http://archive.is/wip/3Xqgm; source: | https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/13/us/politics/kiev-pronunciation.html | , archived-source: http://archive.is/KjrWw | | BuzzFeed: December 31, 2019. Official quote from BuzzFeed: "We | updated our style to “Kyiv” to refer to Ukraine’s capital city. The | “Kiev” spelling is transliterated from the Russian language, while | "Kyiv" is from Ukrainian." (source on BuzzFeed Styleguide @Twitter: | https://twitter.com/styleguide/status/1212079459282685954 , | archived-source: http://archive.is/wip/0I4rB ; BuzzFeed Styleguide: | https://www.buzzfeed.com/emmyf/buzzfeed-style-guide ; | archived-source BuzzFeed Styleguide: http://archive.is/G2Y13 | | Reuters, June 12, 2020. Official quote from Reuters: "From June | 15 the capital of Ukraine will be written as Kyiv at | @Reuters". (source Reuters' journalist Tommy Lund @Twitter: | https://twitter.com/tommylundn/status/1271344841243471872, | archived-source: http://archive.is/UqgwX; source @Reuters | styleguide: | http://handbook.reuters.com/index.php?title=K#Kyiv.2C_not_Kiev ; | archived-source @Reuters styleguide: http://archive.is/QZyqw | | Facebook, June 26, 2020. Official quote from Facebook: "After | reviewing, we switched to using the page “Kyiv” to represent this | region". (source: Minister of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine (MFA of | Ukraine) Dmytro Kuleba and MFA of Ukraine page CorrectUA, | archived-source: http://archive.is/XKXoz --73.75.115.5 (talk) — | 73.75.115.5 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this | topic. 04:22, 1 July 2020 (UTC) —Relisting. ProcrastinatingReader | (talk) 18:46, 28 August 2020 (UTC) —Relisting. Steel1943 (talk) | 17:45, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
Further, beyond that list, there is also an even more comprehensive list at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Kyiv/sources .
As far as this group, I am not sure what the WSJ or AP does is particularly relevant. However, I think the decisions of English-language naming authorities, like the USGS Board on Geographical Names, and international authorities that designate things in English, like IATA and ICAO, are more relevant and they have gone to using Kyiv as the primary name. What are similar governmental and international authorities doing on this?
I don't know what are examples of "similar" authorities are; can you offer some?
I do think, however, that what we are trying to do is measure cultural change among English speakers, and that is a hard thing to do. I think what major English-language publications choose to do is probably a much better indicator of cultural change than what an international trade association of airlines chooses to do, so I think the WSJ+AP+NYT examples (all of which were present when we last discussed this over a year ago) are far more compelling and persuasive.
Michael H Deckers <michael.h.deckers@googlemail.com> wrote on Thu, 26 Nov 2020 at 11:15:14 EST in <9e430fe2-4389-7539-bf60-6b2a9a48ba74@googlemail.com>:
Current occurrence counts are "Kiev": 135e+6 "Kyiv": 48e+6 so that the frequencies of the two spellings are indeed not far apart.
Although I do not think the numbers tell the full story, and generally speaking that they are not helpful for answering the question of whether we should switch when a change is made (as opposed to what spelling we should choose for a new identifier if a new time zone rule were needed), my understanding is that it's important to be pretty careful how you do these queries. For instance, it's generally judged necessary to exclude both "Chicken Kiev" (recipe) and "Dynamo Kyiv" (a football club) because both are effectively proper nouns that skew the results. But also that what you get back from Google depends on where you are in the world, and other factors.
And here, on this list, we should be clear about what these are. Are these Google search results from some particular location, and are they the estimates from the first page of results, or the more accurate counts from the final.
It may be more convincing to take a look at the Google Trends plot ("interest over time") linked from the Wikipedia sources page: https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?q=kiev,kyiv It shows several crossovers recently with a projected line of Kyiv exceeding Kiev.
I think that this is consistent with waiting for a majority for Kyiv. My spelling checker knows "Kiev" but not "Kyiv".
This is an interesting point, to talk about dictionaries. Many of them are descriptive rather than prescriptive and often lag spoken and written language by years, sometimes by decades or scores of decades. And for computer word lists, there may be no practical method for updating them short of a massive operating system upgrade.
If I looked at my system, I shudder to think of the age of /usr/share/dict/words (which has neither, ha!), or even the ancient version of Microsoft Word.
I'd suggest dictionaries give us a very long time-constant view of these issue and that a time-constant measured in decades is probably not the right authority for our project to make this decision, but of course reasonable people can disagree! But, of course, in practice, spelling of proper nouns in computer spell-checkers is not a big deal.
Michael H Deckers via tz <tz@iana.org> wrote on Fri, 27 Nov 2020 at 07:15:08 EST in <b5b423dc-2a65-6bb9-3b23-a0df8dc8f9b2@googlemail.com>: ...
It will take some time until "Kyiv" becomes the mainstream English spelling -- one problem with it is that it is not clear how it should be pronounced.
I'm not quite sure why pronunciation matters to us. I'll note, however, that there is considerable concern over the proper pronunciation of the city, and my understanding is that the obvious and common pronunciation of "Kiev" is regarded as incorrect. Consequently, if "Kyiv" introduces a little bit of friction on how to pronounce, that may in fact be a good thing and helpful in making English speakers question their pronunciation when it is worth questioning.
What I find surprising is that this issue comes up so often. I hope it is not a political issue with which tzdb should not be involved.
I'm not entirely sure what you mean, and I don't think this sort of ambiguous comment is helpful. Are you likening it to a situation where there are two warring groups who favor opposing spellings and the change has come about because one group has risen to power over the other, and our accepting the change would be like taking sides in a civil war, especially one that could change again quickly?
I think this becomes a very difficult question to analyze, because the differentiating {a conflict between two sides in a civil war} from {a decades-long conflict between two adjacent nations of unequal size and resources where one has a history of expansionism} may be more challenging than expected.
I think we can say with confidence that absent a major geopolitical shift, the current preference for Kyiv is very unlikely to change.
Jacob Pratt <jacob@jhpratt.dev> wrote on Fri, 27 Nov 2020 at 04:43:28 EST in <CAHbUps4dhgAMB918ggzLaRTxEw5= 2TS2kiOmscme7nP38dvtoQ@mail.gmail.com>:
As has been stated by others, the listing should not be taken as something to be displayed. The use of Kiev over Kyiv is well established in the tz database. The fact that programmers do not use the CLDR as intended is not the fault of the maintainers of the tz database.
The last is...not a fair claim. The tz database came long before CLDR and a time when Unix was centered on US English. It is not correct to say that the tz maintainers have had no responsibility for the way in which internationalization has occurred. We chose to use the identifier in the file system, and also to ignore the issue for a long time, and then to leverage CLDR for internationalization, rather than integrating such issues more tightly. This is not to say our choices were not reasonable or justified, but they were nonetheless our choices that contributed to the situation ("fault").
-- jhawk@alum.mit.edu John Hawkinson
On 27 Nov 2020, at 15:04, Andriy Ivanchenko <ivanchenko.andriy@gmail.com> wrote:
Thanks for your answers.
I didn't know I wasn't the first. But I am convinced that I will not be the last. Therefore, I advise you to prepare automatic answers.
A search through the mailing list archive would have shown similar requests every few months for the past several years.
I hope that you will still change the name to Kyiv.
In time, it'll happen. jch
IMHO, all this academic debate over which form is more prevalent has gotten way out of hand. Are we so rigid that we have stopped listening? I mean seriously, how hard is it to add a link? It would take all of 5 minutes. We wouldn't even have to make the Kyiv spelling primary. Just make a link already. Respectfully, Matt Johnson-Pint ________________________________ From: tz <tz-bounces@iana.org> on behalf of John Haxby <john.haxby@oracle.com> Sent: Friday, November 27, 2020, 9:30 AM To: Andriy Ivanchenko Cc: tz@iana.org; John Hawkinson Subject: Re: [tz] KyivNotKiev
On 27 Nov 2020, at 15:04, Andriy Ivanchenko <ivanchenko.andriy@gmail.com> wrote:
Thanks for your answers.
I didn't know I wasn't the first. But I am convinced that I will not be the last. Therefore, I advise you to prepare automatic answers.
A search through the mailing list archive would have shown similar requests every few months for the past several years.
I hope that you will still change the name to Kyiv.
In time, it'll happen. jch
On 27/11/2020 17:54, Matt Johnson-Pint wrote:
IMHO, all this academic debate over which form is more prevalent has gotten way out of hand. Are we so rigid that we have stopped listening? I mean seriously, how hard is it to add a link? It would take all of 5 minutes. We wouldn't even have to make the Kyiv spelling primary. Just make a link already.
The major problem is that lazy programmers simply list the tz id's as if they are all that is available. Adding extra id's will just result in both being listed and then one gets even more complaints? -- Lester Caine - G8HFL ----------------------------- Contact - https://lsces.uk/wiki/Contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - https://lsces.uk Model Engineers Digital Workshop - https://medw.uk Rainbow Digital Media - https://rainbowdigitalmedia.uk
It looks like your base has inadvertently become a hostage to politics. Theoretically, your point of view should coincide with UN resolutions. It says that Russia temporarily occupied Crimea. And this territory is still considered Ukrainian. You can find evidence on the google => “site:undocs.org crimea occupation”. I found the following information in your database: # From Alexander Krivenyshev (2014-03-17): # time change at 2:00 (2am) on March 30, 2014 # https://vz.ru/news/2014/3/17/677464.html # From Paul Eggert (2014-03-30): # Simferopol and Sevastopol reportedly changed their central town clocks # late the previous day, but this appears to have been ceremonial # and the discrepancies are small enough to not worry about. 2:00 EU EE%sT 2014 Mar 30 2:00 4:00 - MSK 2014 Oct 26 2:00s 3:00 - MSK The source of your time change data comes from the occupying country. Unreliable source. Can you tell me the reasons for your decision? And don't you plan to correct this mistake? Maybe this is a question for another topic. But from my point of view it's all the same.
The tz database follow the principle of ground truth, as in the time being used on the ground, hence even for area occupied by Axis force in the WWII and have their clock changed by the occupying authority, those changes are still being recorded accordingly in the tz database. 在 2020年11月28日週六 21:12，Andriy Ivanchenko <ivanchenko.andriy@gmail.com> 寫道：
It looks like your base has inadvertently become a hostage to politics.
Theoretically, your point of view should coincide with UN resolutions. It says that Russia temporarily occupied Crimea. And this territory is still considered Ukrainian.
You can find evidence on the google => “site:undocs.org crimea occupation”.
I found the following information in your database:
# From Alexander Krivenyshev (2014-03-17):
# time change at 2:00 (2am) on March 30, 2014
# https://vz.ru/news/2014/3/17/677464.html
# From Paul Eggert (2014-03-30):
# Simferopol and Sevastopol reportedly changed their central town clocks
# late the previous day, but this appears to have been ceremonial
# and the discrepancies are small enough to not worry about.
2:00 EU EE%sT 2014 Mar 30 2:00
4:00 - MSK 2014 Oct 26 2:00s
3:00 - MSK
The source of your time change data comes from the occupying country. Unreliable source.
Can you tell me the reasons for your decision? And don't you plan to correct this mistake?
Maybe this is a question for another topic. But from my point of view it's all the same.
Imagine all the list time that would be saved if the keys were in some increasing numerical order. On Sat, Nov 28, 2020 at 8:36 AM Phake Nick <c933103@gmail.com> wrote:
The tz database follow the principle of ground truth, as in the time being used on the ground, hence even for area occupied by Axis force in the WWII and have their clock changed by the occupying authority, those changes are still being recorded accordingly in the tz database.
在 2020年11月28日週六 21:12，Andriy Ivanchenko <ivanchenko.andriy@gmail.com> 寫道：
It looks like your base has inadvertently become a hostage to politics.
Theoretically, your point of view should coincide with UN resolutions. It says that Russia temporarily occupied Crimea. And this territory is still considered Ukrainian.
You can find evidence on the google => “site:undocs.org crimea occupation”.
I found the following information in your database:
# From Alexander Krivenyshev (2014-03-17):
# time change at 2:00 (2am) on March 30, 2014
# https://vz.ru/news/2014/3/17/677464.html
# From Paul Eggert (2014-03-30):
# Simferopol and Sevastopol reportedly changed their central town clocks
# late the previous day, but this appears to have been ceremonial
# and the discrepancies are small enough to not worry about.
2:00 EU EE%sT 2014 Mar 30 2:00
4:00 - MSK 2014 Oct 26 2:00s
3:00 - MSK
The source of your time change data comes from the occupying country. Unreliable source.
Can you tell me the reasons for your decision? And don't you plan to correct this mistake?
Maybe this is a question for another topic. But from my point of view it's all the same.
This particular tangent is not very helpful, I think. Although we haven't directly confronted the question recently, I think the project policy in the event of a disputed set of time rules in a single geographic region is to have both rules available, so that folks on the ground can choose as they wish. This is a natural outgrowth of the fact that we don't define borders. Most disputes about time in a particular place are really a question of whether it belongs in one of two adjacent regions. As a result, a switch to numeric tz identifiers would not do anything to reduce discussion about occupied areas during World War II, or whether to modify or add a new rule in the event of major political change in location that affects civil timekeeping practices. It'd only affect how we choose to name the rules, and even then, there would be similar discussions in the numeric-to-location mapping project, whether that were a tz subproject or another one entirely. Also, if we're worried about the list time, I guarantee you that the few hundred messages we have seen in the past ten years about Kyiv vs. Kiev would pale in comparison to the thousands of messages in a single month we would see if there were a serious proposal to go to numeric identifiers. (I'm quite confident that there would be *a lot* of discussion.) p.s.: Would someone like to talk about the effect of New START on global civil timekeeping? I jest! Start a new thread if you must. -- jhawk@alum.mit.edu John Hawkinson John Alvord <johngrahamalvord@gmail.com> wrote on Sat, 28 Nov 2020 at 11:43:08 EST in <CACd6g0vn=vyKY8BY4MoL_XeKt30nZy99jFK8v4ySLcPf7_JJJg@mail.gmail.com>:
Imagine all the list time that would be saved if the keys were in some increasing numerical order.
On Sat, Nov 28, 2020 at 8:36 AM Phake Nick <c933103@gmail.com> wrote:
The tz database follow the principle of ground truth, as in the time being used on the ground, hence even for area occupied by Axis force in the WWII and have their clock changed by the occupying authority, those changes are still being recorded accordingly in the tz database.
If I did it right, I started a new topic about the conflict area. сб, 28 лист. 2020 о 18:36 Phake Nick <c933103@gmail.com> пише:
The tz database follow the principle of ground truth, as in the time being used on the ground, hence even for area occupied by Axis force in the WWII and have their clock changed by the occupying authority, those changes are still being recorded accordingly in the tz database.
在 2020年11月28日週六 21:12，Andriy Ivanchenko <ivanchenko.andriy@gmail.com> 寫道：
It looks like your base has inadvertently become a hostage to politics.
Theoretically, your point of view should coincide with UN resolutions. It says that Russia temporarily occupied Crimea. And this territory is still considered Ukrainian.
You can find evidence on the google => “site:undocs.org crimea occupation”.
I found the following information in your database:
# From Alexander Krivenyshev (2014-03-17):
# time change at 2:00 (2am) on March 30, 2014
# https://vz.ru/news/2014/3/17/677464.html
# From Paul Eggert (2014-03-30):
# Simferopol and Sevastopol reportedly changed their central town clocks
# late the previous day, but this appears to have been ceremonial
# and the discrepancies are small enough to not worry about.
2:00 EU EE%sT 2014 Mar 30 2:00
4:00 - MSK 2014 Oct 26 2:00s
3:00 - MSK
The source of your time change data comes from the occupying country. Unreliable source.
Can you tell me the reasons for your decision? And don't you plan to correct this mistake?
Maybe this is a question for another topic. But from my point of view it's all the same.
On 11/27/20 9:54 AM, Matt Johnson-Pint wrote:
how hard is it to add a link? ... We wouldn't even have to make the Kyiv spelling primary.
This sounds like a good suggestion. We could add a link line as in the patch below. This would be a test of the new feature of *forward* compatibility, not *backward* compatibility, but it's pretty much the same thing as far as the implementation goes so I'm not sure it's worth the hassle of creating a new 'forward' file. Now that FreeBSD uses 'backward' along with everybody else, putting this line in 'backward' means it should be supported by everybody who cares about alternate names. I had already been meaning to move some other links to 'backward' for similar reasons, but I figure we might as well do the tougher case first. I have not committed this patch, as the area is controversial. diff --git a/backward b/backward index e13ae52..3327e58 100644 --- a/backward +++ b/backward @@ -1,9 +1,9 @@ -# tzdb links for backward compatibility +# tzdb links for backward and forward compatibility # This file is in the public domain, so clarified as of # 2009-05-17 by Arthur David Olson. -# This file provides links between current names for timezones +# This section provides links between current names for timezones # and their old names. Many names changed in late 1993. # Link TARGET LINK-NAME @@ -130,3 +130,9 @@ Link Etc/UTC UTC Link Etc/UTC Universal Link Europe/Moscow W-SU Link Etc/UTC Zulu + + +# This section is for forward compatibility, where the primary name is +# likely to change if current trends in common English usage continue. + +Link Europe/Kiev Europe/Kyiv
Folks, If we are regarding these as English identifiers, we should be ignoring all these political arguments, and *STOP* adding alternate spellings, exccept for technical reasons when time zones split or combine. Alternate spellings and scripts are localization issues that should be dealt with by the likes of CLDR and ICU libraries. If the characters to be used were not in the POSIX base character set, we would have no hesitation just saying *NO*; we should have no hesitation just saying *NO* to political arguments! Whether there are more occurrences on more sites should have no relevance once the identifier has been assigned, just as other location selection criteria such as population are considered irrelevant once an identifier has been assigned. We have dropped posixrules and eliminated many other legacy rules and zones, we should in the course of time, eliminate all the alternate spellings, keeping only the base zone identifiers. Otherwise we appear to have given up any basis for resisting these political complaints and we should just add a link anytime anyone has any political objection to how we identify it. If this change is made, I would promptly expect growing demands for more political changes, as we have been shown to waver in the face of political demands unrelated to technical issues. There will be more demands to change or add official or remove unofficial zone identifiers on political bases. And for most English speakers the locations under discussion will for decades continue to be referred to as Ukraine, Crimea, Sebastopol, Kiev, etc. regardless of what the locals want to call it or have others call it. Few English speakers will recognize or assign any meaning to new names, unless both appear together regularly with explanations on common social and tabloid media web sites, which is unlikely as it not click bait. Those sites will continue to use the old spellings, as their primary focus is getting their readers attention, with words they recognize and could use. -- Take care. Thanks, Brian Inglis, Calgary, Alberta, Canada On 2020-11-28 11:38, Paul Eggert wrote:
On 11/27/20 9:54 AM, Matt Johnson-Pint wrote:
how hard is it to add a link? ... We wouldn't even have to make the Kyiv spelling primary.
This sounds like a good suggestion. We could add a link line as in the patch below. This would be a test of the new feature of *forward* compatibility, not *backward* compatibility, but it's pretty much the same thing as far as the implementation goes so I'm not sure it's worth the hassle of creating a new 'forward' file. Now that FreeBSD uses 'backward' along with everybody else, putting this line in 'backward' means it should be supported by everybody who cares about alternate names.
I had already been meaning to move some other links to 'backward' for similar reasons, but I figure we might as well do the tougher case first.
I have not committed this patch, as the area is controversial.
diff --git a/backward b/backward index e13ae52..3327e58 100644 --- a/backward +++ b/backward @@ -1,9 +1,9 @@ -# tzdb links for backward compatibility +# tzdb links for backward and forward compatibility
# This file is in the public domain, so clarified as of # 2009-05-17 by Arthur David Olson.
-# This file provides links between current names for timezones +# This section provides links between current names for timezones # and their old names. Many names changed in late 1993.
# Link TARGET LINK-NAME @@ -130,3 +130,9 @@ Link Etc/UTC UTC Link Etc/UTC Universal Link Europe/Moscow W-SU Link Etc/UTC Zulu + + +# This section is for forward compatibility, where the primary name is +# likely to change if current trends in common English usage continue. + +Link Europe/Kiev Europe/Kyiv
I think the fact that we have a 200-e-mail thread about this every time someone brings up the issue of Ukraine (or, less frequently, another one of these political arguments) means that the policy about not getting into political arguments is /failing/, because no one's time is being saved here. If there's going to be a rule about not wanting to get involved in the political stuff, it should actually be enforced. Hold any e-mail that mentions Kiev or Kyiv or Ukraine in a moderation queue and only let through the ones with simple factual information. Or add a second mailing list `tz-nomenclature@` or `tz-political@` where that sort of thing is on topic, and impose bans (temporary or permanent) on people who bring it up on the main list. Either that or abandon the pretense that we don't engage in political arguments at all and invite people to make their own political arguments. Otherwise one is in danger of imposing an asshole filter <https://siderea.livejournal.com/1230660.html> (somewhat crudely named and described on a site with an unfortunate color scheme¹, but an important concept nonetheless) — where people are rewarded for ignoring the FAQ and/or violating the cultural norms of the list. Best. Paul ¹On the "asshole filter" site, there's a "Readability" checkbox that will switch the site into a much more reasonable color scheme. On 11/28/20 4:07 PM, Brian Inglis wrote:
Folks,
If we are regarding these as English identifiers, we should be ignoring all these political arguments, and *STOP* adding alternate spellings, exccept for technical reasons when time zones split or combine.
Alternate spellings and scripts are localization issues that should be dealt with by the likes of CLDR and ICU libraries. If the characters to be used were not in the POSIX base character set, we would have no hesitation just saying *NO*; we should have no hesitation just saying *NO* to political arguments! Whether there are more occurrences on more sites should have no relevance once the identifier has been assigned, just as other location selection criteria such as population are considered irrelevant once an identifier has been assigned.
We have dropped posixrules and eliminated many other legacy rules and zones, we should in the course of time, eliminate all the alternate spellings, keeping only the base zone identifiers.
Otherwise we appear to have given up any basis for resisting these political complaints and we should just add a link anytime anyone has any political objection to how we identify it. If this change is made, I would promptly expect growing demands for more political changes, as we have been shown to waver in the face of political demands unrelated to technical issues. There will be more demands to change or add official or remove unofficial zone identifiers on political bases.
And for most English speakers the locations under discussion will for decades continue to be referred to as Ukraine, Crimea, Sebastopol, Kiev, etc. regardless of what the locals want to call it or have others call it. Few English speakers will recognize or assign any meaning to new names, unless both appear together regularly with explanations on common social and tabloid media web sites, which is unlikely as it not click bait. Those sites will continue to use the old spellings, as their primary focus is getting their readers attention, with words they recognize and could use.
On 2020-11-28, at 14:25:57, Paul Ganssle wrote:
... or abandon the pretense that we don't engage in political arguments at all and invite people to make their own political arguments. Otherwise one is in danger of imposing an asshole filter (somewhat crudely named and described on a site with an unfortunate color scheme¹, but an important concept nonetheless) — where people are rewarded for ignoring the FAQ and/or violating the cultural norms of the list.
Good read: https://siderea.livejournal.com/1230660.html The obvious remedy is simply not to append to such threads; the most discomfiting reaction is apathy. But it doesn't work. See: I just transgressed my own precept. Please don't reply further except to me directly. -- gil
If we really don't wamt to deal with localization issue then we should use the original spelling instead of English/Latin Character transliteration Your comment on English translation name being stable is rather inaccurate, Alma-Ata have become Almaty, Bombay have become Mumbai, Leningrad have become Saint Petersburg. 在 2020年11月29日週日 05:08，Brian Inglis <Brian.Inglis@systematicsw.ab.ca> 寫道：
Folks,
If we are regarding these as English identifiers, we should be ignoring all these political arguments, and *STOP* adding alternate spellings, exccept for technical reasons when time zones split or combine.
Alternate spellings and scripts are localization issues that should be dealt with by the likes of CLDR and ICU libraries. If the characters to be used were not in the POSIX base character set, we would have no hesitation just saying *NO*; we should have no hesitation just saying *NO* to political arguments! Whether there are more occurrences on more sites should have no relevance once the identifier has been assigned, just as other location selection criteria such as population are considered irrelevant once an identifier has been assigned.
We have dropped posixrules and eliminated many other legacy rules and zones, we should in the course of time, eliminate all the alternate spellings, keeping only the base zone identifiers.
Otherwise we appear to have given up any basis for resisting these political complaints and we should just add a link anytime anyone has any political objection to how we identify it. If this change is made, I would promptly expect growing demands for more political changes, as we have been shown to waver in the face of political demands unrelated to technical issues. There will be more demands to change or add official or remove unofficial zone identifiers on political bases.
And for most English speakers the locations under discussion will for decades continue to be referred to as Ukraine, Crimea, Sebastopol, Kiev, etc. regardless of what the locals want to call it or have others call it. Few English speakers will recognize or assign any meaning to new names, unless both appear together regularly with explanations on common social and tabloid media web sites, which is unlikely as it not click bait. Those sites will continue to use the old spellings, as their primary focus is getting their readers attention, with words they recognize and could use.
-- Take care. Thanks, Brian Inglis, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
On 2020-11-28 11:38, Paul Eggert wrote:
On 11/27/20 9:54 AM, Matt Johnson-Pint wrote:
how hard is it to add a link? ... We wouldn't even have to make the Kyiv spelling primary.
This sounds like a good suggestion. We could add a link line as in the patch below. This would be a test of the new feature of *forward* compatibility, not *backward* compatibility, but it's pretty much the same thing as far as the implementation goes so I'm not sure it's worth the hassle of creating a new 'forward' file. Now that FreeBSD uses 'backward' along with everybody else, putting this line in 'backward' means it should be supported by everybody who cares about alternate names.
I had already been meaning to move some other links to 'backward' for similar reasons, but I figure we might as well do the tougher case first.
I have not committed this patch, as the area is controversial.
diff --git a/backward b/backward index e13ae52..3327e58 100644 --- a/backward +++ b/backward @@ -1,9 +1,9 @@ -# tzdb links for backward compatibility +# tzdb links for backward and forward compatibility
# This file is in the public domain, so clarified as of # 2009-05-17 by Arthur David Olson.
-# This file provides links between current names for timezones +# This section provides links between current names for timezones # and their old names. Many names changed in late 1993.
# Link TARGET LINK-NAME @@ -130,3 +130,9 @@ Link Etc/UTC UTC Link Etc/UTC Universal Link Europe/Moscow W-SU Link Etc/UTC Zulu + + +# This section is for forward compatibility, where the primary name is +# likely to change if current trends in common English usage continue. + +Link Europe/Kiev Europe/Kyiv
Given that they are identifiers indicative of the location, there is no reason to ever change them from their historical initially assigned POSIX base character set values, unless technical time changes occur. My comment was about what names native English readers and speakers are likely to recognize and use and how long it will take to change that mentality. There seems to be a lot of inertia resisting changes propagated by modern systems, exemplified by support for Boris, Donald, and their ilk and supporters, who would like to believe the clock could and should be turned back to maintain 20th century or maybe even Victorian norms. -- Take care. Thanks, Brian Inglis, Calgary, Alberta, Canada On 2020-11-28 14:41, Phake Nick wrote:
If we really don't wamt to deal with localization issue then we should use the original spelling instead of English/Latin Character transliteration Your comment on English translation name being stable is rather inaccurate, Alma-Ata have become Almaty, Bombay have become Mumbai, Leningrad have become Saint Petersburg.
在 2020年11月29日週日 05:08，Brian Inglis 寫道： If we are regarding these as English identifiers, we should be ignoring all these political arguments, and *STOP* adding alternate spellings, exccept for technical reasons when time zones split or combine.
Alternate spellings and scripts are localization issues that should be dealt with by the likes of CLDR and ICU libraries. If the characters to be used were not in the POSIX base character set, we would have no hesitation just saying *NO*; we should have no hesitation just saying *NO* to political arguments! Whether there are more occurrences on more sites should have no relevance once the identifier has been assigned, just as other location selection criteria such as population are considered irrelevant once an identifier has been assigned.
We have dropped posixrules and eliminated many other legacy rules and zones, we should in the course of time, eliminate all the alternate spellings, keeping only the base zone identifiers.
Otherwise we appear to have given up any basis for resisting these political complaints and we should just add a link anytime anyone has any political objection to how we identify it. If this change is made, I would promptly expect growing demands for more political changes, as we have been shown to waver in the face of political demands unrelated to technical issues. There will be more demands to change or add official or remove unofficial zone identifiers on political bases.
And for most English speakers the locations under discussion will for decades continue to be referred to as Ukraine, Crimea, Sebastopol, Kiev, etc. regardless of what the locals want to call it or have others call it. Few English speakers will recognize or assign any meaning to new names, unless both appear together regularly with explanations on common social and tabloid media web sites, which is unlikely as it not click bait. Those sites will continue to use the old spellings, as their primary focus is getting their readers attention, with words they recognize and could use.
-- Take care. Thanks, Brian Inglis, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
On 2020-11-28 11:38, Paul Eggert wrote: > On 11/27/20 9:54 AM, Matt Johnson-Pint wrote: > >> how hard is it to add a link? ... We wouldn't even have to make the Kyiv >> spelling primary. > > This sounds like a good suggestion. We could add a link line as in the patch > below. This would be a test of the new feature of *forward* compatibility, not > *backward* compatibility, but it's pretty much the same thing as far as the > implementation goes so I'm not sure it's worth the hassle of creating a new > 'forward' file. Now that FreeBSD uses 'backward' along with everybody else, > putting this line in 'backward' means it should be supported by everybody who > cares about alternate names. > > I had already been meaning to move some other links to 'backward' for similar > reasons, but I figure we might as well do the tougher case first. > > I have not committed this patch, as the area is controversial. > > diff --git a/backward b/backward > index e13ae52..3327e58 100644 > --- a/backward > +++ b/backward > @@ -1,9 +1,9 @@ > -# tzdb links for backward compatibility > +# tzdb links for backward and forward compatibility > > > # This file is in the public domain, so clarified as of > # 2009-05-17 by Arthur David Olson. > > > -# This file provides links between current names for timezones > +# This section provides links between current names for timezones > # and their old names. Many names changed in late 1993. > > > # Link TARGET LINK-NAME > @@ -130,3 +130,9 @@ Link Etc/UTC UTC > Link Etc/UTC Universal > Link Europe/Moscow W-SU > Link Etc/UTC Zulu > + > + > +# This section is for forward compatibility, where the primary name is > +# likely to change if current trends in common English usage continue. > + > +Link Europe/Kiev Europe/Kyiv
Bombay's name change to Mumbai was announced in 1995. Almaty was 1993. Saint Petersburg was 1991. Nowadays you won't hear their previous English name anymore even when you talk with English speakers who support those politicians you listed. Making up fantasy about a group of people you dislike is not going to be conductive to discussion on an international mailing list 在 2020年11月29日週日 07:35，Brian Inglis <Brian.Inglis@systematicsw.ab.ca> 寫道：
My comment was about what names native English readers and speakers are likely to recognize and use and how long it will take to change that mentality. There seems to be a lot of inertia resisting changes propagated by modern systems, exemplified by support for Boris, Donald, and their ilk and supporters, who would like to believe the clock could and should be turned back to maintain 20th century or maybe even Victorian norms.
On Sun, 29 Nov 2020, Phake Nick wrote:
Bombay's name change to Mumbai was announced in 1995. Almaty was 1993. Saint Petersburg was 1991. Nowadays you won't hear their previous English name anymore even when you talk with English speakers who support those politicians you listed.
Well, not quite correct. In the Philippines (where most people speak a reasonable amount of English as well as their many local dialects of Tagalog), they often use a rather derogatory term "boomba" to refer to persons of Indian descent. This racial slur did not adapt to Mumbai name change. But that is a discussion for a different list. +--------------------+--------------------------+-----------------------+ | Paul Goyette | PGP Key fingerprint: | E-mail addresses: | | (Retired) | FA29 0E3B 35AF E8AE 6651 | paul@whooppee.com | | Software Developer | 0786 F758 55DE 53BA 7731 | pgoyette@netbsd.org | +--------------------+--------------------------+-----------------------+
Paul Goyette said:
Bombay's name change to Mumbai was announced in 1995. Almaty was 1993. Saint Petersburg was 1991. Nowadays you won't hear their previous English name anymore even when you talk with English speakers who support those politicians you listed.
Well, not quite correct.
I still refer to Leningrad because that was what it was called the times I visited it. -- Clive D.W. Feather | If you lie to the compiler, Email: clive@davros.org | it will get its revenge. Web: http://www.davros.org | - Henry Spencer Mobile: +44 7973 377646
On 2020-11-29 02:38:54 (+0800), Paul Eggert wrote:
On 11/27/20 9:54 AM, Matt Johnson-Pint wrote:
how hard is it to add a link? ... We wouldn't even have to make the Kyiv spelling primary.
This sounds like a good suggestion. We could add a link line as in the patch below. This would be a test of the new feature of *forward* compatibility, not *backward* compatibility, but it's pretty much the same thing as far as the implementation goes so I'm not sure it's worth the hassle of creating a new 'forward' file. Now that FreeBSD uses 'backward' along with everybody else, putting this line in 'backward' means it should be supported by everybody who cares about alternate names.
I had already been meaning to move some other links to 'backward' for similar reasons, but I figure we might as well do the tougher case first.
I have not committed this patch, as the area is controversial.
If we're going to make a change ... we might as well do it in one go. Just do the rename and put the old name in backward. It seems obvious that that's the way the data will look in the future anyway. I can't see any technical benefits of trying out forward compatibility where backward compatibility already covers the expected problems. Philip -- Philip Paeps Senior Reality Engineer Alternative Enterprises
On 2020-11-28 18:11, Philip Paeps wrote:
On 2020-11-29 02:38:54 (+0800), Paul Eggert wrote:
On 11/27/20 9:54 AM, Matt Johnson-Pint wrote:
how hard is it to add a link? ... We wouldn't even have to make the Kyiv spelling primary.
This sounds like a good suggestion. We could add a link line as in the patch below. This would be a test of the new feature of *forward* compatibility, not *backward* compatibility, but it's pretty much the same thing as far as the implementation goes so I'm not sure it's worth the hassle of creating a new 'forward' file. Now that FreeBSD uses 'backward' along with everybody else, putting this line in 'backward' means it should be supported by everybody who cares about alternate names.
I had already been meaning to move some other links to 'backward' for similar reasons, but I figure we might as well do the tougher case first.
I have not committed this patch, as the area is controversial.
If we're going to make a change ... we might as well do it in one go. Just do the rename and put the old name in backward. It seems obvious that that's the way the data will look in the future anyway.
I can't see any technical benefits of trying out forward compatibility where backward compatibility already covers the expected problems.
It makes the alternative available for those downstreams who pick it up and include it in their packages. If you look across the various tzdata package builds, including embedded downstreams, you will find a wide variety of levels of compatibility provided, corresponding to most of the selection parameters provided in the build. In some cases all backward links are dropped, possibly relying on CLDR and ICU for any compatability; in others a lot of legacy zone data is kept around, such that nothing that ever worked will ever produce different output, except perhaps for corrections, down to historical zone abbreviations; everything in between may be included, depending on distribution or project policy, maintainer intent and conscientiousness: the mode is likely to be the upstream tzdata defaults, perhaps with patches providing some (additional) deprecation notice period allowing other packages to be adapted, which may include the system time library routines. In some databases, zone abbreviations as well as identifiers may be used as keys to the zones; in some data warehouses' time dimensions, many time properties can be used as keys, including zone (meta)data. -- Take care. Thanks, Brian Inglis, Calgary, Alberta, Canada This email may be disturbing to some readers as it contains too much technical detail. Reader discretion is advised. [Data in binary units and prefixes, physical quantities in SI.]
On 29/11/2020 08:13, Brian Inglis wrote:
In some cases all backward links are dropped, possibly relying on CLDR and ICU for any compatability; in others a lot of legacy zone data is kept around, such that nothing that ever worked will ever produce different output, except perhaps for corrections, down to historical zone abbreviations; everything in between may be included, depending on distribution or project policy, maintainer intent and conscientiousness: the mode is likely to be the upstream tzdata defaults, perhaps with patches providing some (additional) deprecation notice period allowing other packages to be adapted, which may include the system time library routines.
Given the important material identified by data that is only available in the 'backward' storage it IS about time the ability to drop it was removed. The second world war was not that long ago and where backward differences are not included there is no indication that the material returned me well be incorrect! -- Lester Caine - G8HFL ----------------------------- Contact - https://lsces.uk/wiki/Contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - https://lsces.uk Model Engineers Digital Workshop - https://medw.uk Rainbow Digital Media - https://rainbowdigitalmedia.uk
"Lester" == Lester Caine <lester@lsces.uk> writes:
Lester> Given the important material identified by data that is only Lester> available in the 'backward' storage I think you're confusing 'backward' and 'backzone'; the 'backward' file contains NO data, only Link directives for obsoleted names. Actual data about zones with only pre-1970 differences from current zones is in 'backzone'. -- Andrew.
On 29/11/2020 18:06, Andrew Gierth wrote:
Lester> Given the important material identified by data that is only Lester> available in the 'backward' storage
I think you're confusing 'backward' and 'backzone'; the 'backward' file contains NO data, only Link directives for obsoleted names. Actual data about zones with only pre-1970 differences from current zones is in 'backzone'.
You are quite right ... but both contain important historic information, and allowing them to be 'switched off' simply because it saves a few bytes of data misses the point that ANY of the systems on which it has been switched off may then be lying on it's displayed information rather than simply saying 'can not display'! -- Lester Caine - G8HFL ----------------------------- Contact - https://lsces.uk/wiki/Contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - https://lsces.uk Model Engineers Digital Workshop - https://medw.uk Rainbow Digital Media - https://rainbowdigitalmedia.uk
On 2020-11-29 03:10, Lester Caine wrote:
On 29/11/2020 08:13, Brian Inglis wrote:
In some cases all backward links are dropped, possibly relying on CLDR and ICU for any compatability; in others a lot of legacy zone data is kept around, such that nothing that ever worked will ever produce different output, except perhaps for corrections, down to historical zone abbreviations; everything in between may be included, depending on distribution or project policy, maintainer intent and conscientiousness: the mode is likely to be the upstream tzdata defaults, perhaps with patches providing some (additional) deprecation notice period allowing other packages to be adapted, which may include the system time library routines.
Given the important material identified by data that is only available in the 'backward' storage it IS about time the ability to drop it was removed. The second world war was not that long ago and where backward differences are not included there is no indication that the material returned me well be incorrect!
Given the wide range in capabilities and storage capacities across systems using tzdata, it is essential that downstreams have all options available to minimize the space used. It also uses less resources to provide updates, which are probably as important as the zones. -- Take care. Thanks, Brian Inglis, Calgary, Alberta, Canada This email may be disturbing to some readers as it contains too much technical detail. Reader discretion is advised. [Data in binary units and prefixes, physical quantities in SI.]
In English the name is pronounced kee-yev, ki-yev, ki-ev not ki-yi-iv, ki-yi-oo, kee-yoo, so the Ukrainian pronunciation and transliteration is inaccurate and irrelevant for most global English speakers, who mainly never have nor ever will hear or see the word Kyiv, or use it, or understand it is the same as Kiev, as they daily use Am-err-ika, Flaw-rinse, Lee-on, Mi-lan, Par-iss, Ro-am, etc. depending on their local pronunciation by region. -- Take care. Thanks, Brian Inglis, Calgary, Alberta, Canada On 2020-11-27 08:04, Andriy Ivanchenko wrote:
пт, 27 лист. 2020 о 15:42 John Hawkinson пише: Thanks for your answers.
I didn't know I wasn't the first. But I am convinced that I will not be the last. Therefore, I advise you to prepare automatic answers.
I hope that you will still change the name to Kyiv.
I want to take this opportunity to respond to multiple messages; replies all in-line below.
Andriy Ivanchenko <ivanchenko.andriy@gmail.com <mailto:ivanchenko.andriy@gmail.com>> wrote on Fri, 27 Nov 2020 at 06:39:51 EST in <CADS=uUsREjp3QAA0e1dky8oXN9QV6zqJx7xM3FWgBFN_KkEq3A@mail.gmail.com <mailto:uUsREjp3QAA0e1dky8oXN9QV6zqJx7xM3FWgBFN_KkEq3A@mail.gmail.com>>:
> I understand correctly that you do not plan to change Kiev to Kyiv? > Do I still have to wait a while for the final decision?
You do need to wait, but as you have seen, there is considerable opposition.
The reason is that issue has come up many many times since at least 2007, and the consensus has been that Kyiv is insufficiently common in English to warrant making the change. As a result, when you made the request without making it very clear that there is a strong argument that there is new information, you received a lot of knee-jerk reactions from people on the list who have not carefully considered any new information, and also are quite used to and comfortable with the decisions made and repeatedly endorsed in the past 13 years.
But the ultimate decision will come from the project's maintainers, who assess concensus and come to a decision. So it's particularly important what Paul Eggert and Tim Parenti think -- they will ultimately make the decision, in consultation with the members of this mailing list. I hope this lengthy message does not get lost in the frey.
> I don't understand how your system works. > Can you write about it in more detail?
You've received a bunch of replies, but it may be helpful for you to take a look at the mailing list archives. This Google search shows the approx. 120 messages on this topic from the past: https://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Amm.icann.org%2Fpipermail%2Ftz%2F+kyiv <https://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Amm.icann.org%2Fpipermail%2Ftz%2F+kyiv>
Alan Perry <alanp@snowmoose.com <mailto:alanp@snowmoose.com>> wrote on Thu, 26 Nov 2020 at 11:44:05 EST in <16E4CCFC-80B0-4A69-B1DD-4727B8C2BFA2@snowmoose.com <mailto:16E4CCFC-80B0-4A69-B1DD-4727B8C2BFA2@snowmoose.com>>:
> As a Wikipedia editor, I think Mr. Hawkinson should spend some time > participating in the Wikipedia decision making process before trying > to take in characterizing its inertia against change to others.
I was fairly uncomfortable with the tone of this message and wrote Alan Perry about it privately. But I want to remind all of us to speak to the issue, not to the person, where we can do so. (It turns out I have spent considerable time with Wikipedia's processes.)
> I also question his claim that “major English-language authorities > have all switched to Kyiv” without listing them. The English > language doesn’t have official authorities, what constitutes a major > English-language authority is subjective.
It is absolutely subjective, and I don't mean to suggest there are "official" authorities as there are in French. But it remains the case that there are unofficial authorities, and they have strong persuasive value for many speakers of English.
I linked to the Wikipedia discussion because I thought it was pretty fulsome, but perhaps I should have copied some of it here, because people do not follow links. The following comes from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Kyiv/Archive_7#Requested_move_28_August_2... <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Kyiv/Archive_7#Requested_move_28_August_2...> (I've hard-wrapped this to 70 columns, which I hope is not a mistake; see the URL if the formatting is bad for you):
| Original move request 1 July 2020: Kiev → Kyiv – Since October 2019 | when the 9 months ban/moratorium on requesting to change the name of | the article from Kiev to Kyiv was established, the following updates | have happened (per Atlantic Council's article from October 21, 2019 | entitled Kyiv not Kiev: Why spelling matters in Ukraine’s quest for | an independent identity, ""A number of global heavyweights have | recently adopted the Ukrainian-language derived 'Kyiv' as their | official spelling for the country’s capital city, replacing the | Russian-rooted 'Kiev'""). Specifically, a couple of changes have | happened: | 1) all major English publications that used their own stylebook have | made updates to their styleguides and now use Kyiv spelling, | 2) all major English publications that use standard stylebooks | (e.g., Associated Press Stylebook or Canadian Press Stylebook) are | now following recent updates in those styleguides and are now using | Kyiv, | 3) IATA has switched to Kyiv and therefore all international | airports have updated their English spelling to Kyiv, | 4) BGN has switched to Kyiv and, therefore, all major geographical | bodies followed suite and are now using Kyiv and, lastly, | 5) The Library of Congress has switched to Kyiv and, therefore, all | major library organizations followed suite and are now using Kyiv. | | Below is a selection of a few of those major updates: | bne IntelliNews: January 2006. Official quote from bne | IntelliNews: "bne IntelliNews has been using Kyiv since it was | founded in 2006" (source: | https://www.intellinews.com/more-publications-switch-from-kiev-to-kyiv-and-i... <https://www.intellinews.com/more-publications-switch-from-kiev-to-kyiv-and-i...> | ; archived-source: http://archive.is/ZQEHD <http://archive.is/ZQEHD>) | | CBC: January 2011 (previously Kyiv was also used by CBC from | 1999 to 2004). Official quote from CBC: "CBC News adopted the | spelling Kyiv for the city in 2011". (source: | https://www.cbc.ca/news2/indepth/words/kiev-or-kyiv.html <https://www.cbc.ca/news2/indepth/words/kiev-or-kyiv.html> , | archived-source: http://archive.is/kpvo0 <http://archive.is/kpvo0> | | Canadian Press: January 2018. Official quote from the Canadian | Press Stylebook 18th edition: "The Canadian Press stylebook adopts | the Ukrainian rather than the Russian spelling of Ukrainian capital: | Kyiv" source: | https://www.thecanadianpress.com/writing-guides/the-canadian-press-stylebook... <https://www.thecanadianpress.com/writing-guides/the-canadian-press-stylebook...> | | Toronto Star: January 2018. Official quote from the Toronto | Star: "We [at Toronto Star] follow The Canadian Press style (which | adopts the Ukrainian rather than the Russian spelling). It’s Kyiv." | source: | https://www.thestar.com/trust/2018/01/26/the-stars-style-committee-on-the-im... <https://www.thestar.com/trust/2018/01/26/the-stars-style-committee-on-the-im...> | ; archived-source: http://archive.is/d50oE <http://archive.is/d50oE> | | The Guardian, 13 February 2019, Official quote from The | Guardian: "From February 13 the capital of Ukraine will be written | as Kyiv at The Guardian". (source @The Guardian styleguide: | https://www.theguardian.com/guardian-observer-style-guide-k <https://www.theguardian.com/guardian-observer-style-guide-k> ; | archived-source @The Guardian styleguide: http://archive.is/r5OpE <http://archive.is/r5OpE> | | The Calvert Journal 2 April, 2019 Official quote from The | Calvert Journal: "We have decided the time is right to change to | Kyiv" (source: | https://www.calvertjournal.com/articles/show/11100/kiev-kyiv-what-to-call-uk... <https://www.calvertjournal.com/articles/show/11100/kiev-kyiv-what-to-call-uk...> | , archived-source: http://archive.is/hq4xW <http://archive.is/hq4xW> | | BGN (regulates what spelling is used for geographic names in | maps) June 17, 2019. Official quote from BGN: "At its 398th meeting | on June 11, 2019, the Foreign Names Committee of the United States | Board on Geographic Names (BGN) voted unanimously to retire the | spelling “Kiev” as a BGN Conventional name for the capital of | Ukraine. The spelling “Kyiv” has been the BGN Approved name since | 2006, and is now the only name available for standard use within the | United States (U.S.) Government, per the authority of the BGN | (source on BGN: | http://geonames.nga.mil/gns/html/PDFDocs/BGNStatement_Kyiv.pdf <http://geonames.nga.mil/gns/html/PDFDocs/BGNStatement_Kyiv.pdf>, | archived-source: http://archive.is/pLZlO <http://archive.is/pLZlO> | | Associated Press: 14 August, 2019. Official quote from AP: "We | are making a significant change in our style for the Ukrainian | capital city Kiev. It will henceforth be written in text, captions | and datelines as Kyiv." (source on AP: | https://blog.ap.org/announcements/an-update-on-ap-style-on-kyiv <https://blog.ap.org/announcements/an-update-on-ap-style-on-kyiv> , | archived-source: http://archive.is/ONA0S <http://archive.is/ONA0S> | | The Library of Congress: 12 September, 2019. Official quote from | LOC: "In accordance with LC-PCC PS for 16.2.2.5, we have applied the | ALA/LC Romanization Table for Ukrainian in the new authorized access | point rather than using a form that reflects another romanization | scheme. This form is “Kyïv (Ukraine)." (source on lOC | (announcement): | https://listserv.loc.gov/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind1909&L=PCCLIST&P=20135 <https://listserv.loc.gov/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind1909&L=PCCLIST&P=20135>, | archived-source: http://archive.is/XlarP <http://archive.is/XlarP> ; source on LOC (entry): | http://id.loc.gov/authorities/names/n81022031.html <http://id.loc.gov/authorities/names/n81022031.html> , | archived-source: http://archive.is/BzK0T <http://archive.is/BzK0T> | | NPR: September 23, 2019. Official quote from NPR: "Guidance: The | Capital Of Ukraine Is Spelled 'Kyiv'" (source on NPR: | https://www.npr.org/sections/memmos/2019/09/23/763509886/guidance-the-capita... <https://www.npr.org/sections/memmos/2019/09/23/763509886/guidance-the-capita...>, | archived-source: http://archive.is/Lx7Ch <http://archive.is/Lx7Ch> | | The Wall Street Journal: October 3, 2019. Official quote from | WSJ: "After careful consideration, we have joined Associated Press | and Webster’s New World College Dictionary (5th) in using the | spelling Kyiv for the capital of Ukraine" (source on WSJ: | https://blogs.wsj.com/styleandsubstance/2019/10/03/vol-32-no-9-kyiv/ <https://blogs.wsj.com/styleandsubstance/2019/10/03/vol-32-no-9-kyiv/>, | archived-source: http://archive.is/wip/yk3Eh <http://archive.is/wip/yk3Eh> | | The Globe and Mail: October 10, 2019. Official quote from The | Globe and Mail: "The Globe is changing its style on the capital of | Ukraine from the Russian-derived "Kiev" to "Kyiv," the | transliteration the Ukrainian government uses" (source The Globe and | Mail's correspondent Adrian Morrow: | https://twitter.com/adrianmorrow/status/1182340357255831552 <https://twitter.com/adrianmorrow/status/1182340357255831552>, | archived-source: http://archive.is/cLGGZ <http://archive.is/cLGGZ> | | BBC: October 14, 2019. Official quote from BBC: ">From today, BBC | News will be changing its spelling of the Ukrainian capital from | #Kiev to #Kyiv, bringing us in line with the many international | organizations, government agencies, international aviation industry | members and media who’ve adopted this spelling." (source on BBC News | Press Team @Twitter: | https://twitter.com/bbcnewspr/status/1183707458642108416 <https://twitter.com/bbcnewspr/status/1183707458642108416>, | archive-source: http://archive.is/PGhmq <http://archive.is/PGhmq>; source on BBC News | Ukrainian: https://www.bbc.com/ukrainian/news-49999939 <https://www.bbc.com/ukrainian/news-49999939> , | archived-source: http://archive.is/ap1vS <http://archive.is/ap1vS> ; source on BBC Style | Guide: | https://www.bbc.co.uk/academy/en/articles/art20130702112133577 <https://www.bbc.co.uk/academy/en/articles/art20130702112133577>, | archived-source: http://archive.vn/SD07M <http://archive.vn/SD07M> | | The Washington Post: October 2019. Official quote from TWP: "The | Washington Post changes its style guide for the capital of Ukraine, | which henceforth will be Kyiv, and not Kiev. This change is | effective immediately. These changes are in accordance with the way | Ukrainian capital is spelled by Ukrainian institutions, as well by | by other media organizations." (source from WP's correspondent Adam | Taylor's Twitter: | https://twitter.com/mradamtaylor/status/1184470206925676544 <https://twitter.com/mradamtaylor/status/1184470206925676544> , | archived-source from WP's correspondent Adam Taylor's Twitter: | http://archive.is/yFzVy <http://archive.is/yFzVy>; source on Voice of America: | https://ukrainian.voanews.com/a/kyiv-not-kiev/5126392.html <https://ukrainian.voanews.com/a/kyiv-not-kiev/5126392.html>, | source-archived: http://archive.is/nL48F <http://archive.is/nL48F> ; source on The Washington | Post: | https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/starting-in-the-1970s-womens-first-name... <https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/starting-in-the-1970s-womens-first-name...> | , archived-source: http://archive.is/ZrUos <http://archive.is/ZrUos> ) | | The Economist, October, 29 2019. Official quote from The | Economist: "Kyiv spelling is now used at The Economist for Ukraine's | capital" (source news about this on Ukrinform: | https://www.ukrinform.net/rubric-society/2808601-the-economist-starts-using-... <https://www.ukrinform.net/rubric-society/2808601-the-economist-starts-using-...> | , archived-source: http://archive.is/ka7Lv <http://archive.is/ka7Lv> | | Financial Times, October, 29 2019. Official quote from Financial | Times: "Kyiv spelling is now used at Financial Times for Ukraine's | capital" (source news about this on Ukrinform: | https://www.ukrinform.ua/rubric-kyiv/2808219-financial-times-vidteper-pisati... <https://www.ukrinform.ua/rubric-kyiv/2808219-financial-times-vidteper-pisati...> | , archived-source: http://archive.is/wip/kh5YL <http://archive.is/wip/kh5YL> | | IATA (regulates what spelling is used for geographic names in | airports): October, 2019. (source: list of all cities worldwide at | iata.org <http://iata.org>: | https://www.iata.org/contentassets/5989fc2df9824de3826cccfd279f9409/slot-all... <https://www.iata.org/contentassets/5989fc2df9824de3826cccfd279f9409/slot-all...> | ) | | The New York Times: November 18, 2019. Official quote from NYT: | "Note: Days after this article was published, The New York Times | changed its style of spelling for the capital of Ukraine to Kyiv, | reflecting the transliteration from Ukrainian, rather than | Russian. The change is reflected in articles published after | Nov. 18. " (source from NYT's correspondent Andrew E. Kramer's | Twitter: | https://twitter.com/AndrewKramerNYT/status/1196496095184084997 <https://twitter.com/AndrewKramerNYT/status/1196496095184084997>, | archived-source from NYT's correspondent Andrew E. Kramer's Twitter: | http://archive.is/wip/3Xqgm <http://archive.is/wip/3Xqgm>; source: | https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/13/us/politics/kiev-pronunciation.html <https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/13/us/politics/kiev-pronunciation.html> | , archived-source: http://archive.is/KjrWw <http://archive.is/KjrWw> | | BuzzFeed: December 31, 2019. Official quote from BuzzFeed: "We | updated our style to “Kyiv” to refer to Ukraine’s capital city. The | “Kiev” spelling is transliterated from the Russian language, while | "Kyiv" is from Ukrainian." (source on BuzzFeed Styleguide @Twitter: | https://twitter.com/styleguide/status/1212079459282685954 <https://twitter.com/styleguide/status/1212079459282685954> , | archived-source: http://archive.is/wip/0I4rB <http://archive.is/wip/0I4rB> ; BuzzFeed Styleguide: | https://www.buzzfeed.com/emmyf/buzzfeed-style-guide <https://www.buzzfeed.com/emmyf/buzzfeed-style-guide> ; | archived-source BuzzFeed Styleguide: http://archive.is/G2Y13 <http://archive.is/G2Y13> | | Reuters, June 12, 2020. Official quote from Reuters: "From June | 15 the capital of Ukraine will be written as Kyiv at | @Reuters". (source Reuters' journalist Tommy Lund @Twitter: | https://twitter.com/tommylundn/status/1271344841243471872 <https://twitter.com/tommylundn/status/1271344841243471872>, | archived-source: http://archive.is/UqgwX <http://archive.is/UqgwX>; source @Reuters | styleguide: | http://handbook.reuters.com/index.php?title=K#Kyiv.2C_not_Kiev <http://handbook.reuters.com/index.php?title=K#Kyiv.2C_not_Kiev> ; | archived-source @Reuters styleguide: http://archive.is/QZyqw <http://archive.is/QZyqw> | | Facebook, June 26, 2020. Official quote from Facebook: "After | reviewing, we switched to using the page “Kyiv” to represent this | region". (source: Minister of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine (MFA of | Ukraine) Dmytro Kuleba and MFA of Ukraine page CorrectUA, | archived-source: http://archive.is/XKXoz <http://archive.is/XKXoz> --73.75.115.5 (talk) — | 73.75.115.5 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this | topic. 04:22, 1 July 2020 (UTC) —Relisting. ProcrastinatingReader | (talk) 18:46, 28 August 2020 (UTC) —Relisting. Steel1943 (talk) | 17:45, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
Further, beyond that list, there is also an even more comprehensive list at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Kyiv/sources <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Kyiv/sources> .
> As far as this group, I am not sure what the WSJ or AP does is > particularly relevant. However, I think the decisions of > English-language naming authorities, like the USGS Board on > Geographical Names, and international authorities that designate > things in English, like IATA and ICAO, are more relevant and they > have gone to using Kyiv as the primary name. What are similar > governmental and international authorities doing on this?
I don't know what are examples of "similar" authorities are; can you offer some?
I do think, however, that what we are trying to do is measure cultural change among English speakers, and that is a hard thing to do. I think what major English-language publications choose to do is probably a much better indicator of cultural change than what an international trade association of airlines chooses to do, so I think the WSJ+AP+NYT examples (all of which were present when we last discussed this over a year ago) are far more compelling and persuasive.
Michael H Deckers <michael.h.deckers@googlemail.com <mailto:michael.h.deckers@googlemail.com>> wrote on Thu, 26 Nov 2020 at 11:15:14 EST in <9e430fe2-4389-7539-bf60-6b2a9a48ba74@googlemail.com <mailto:9e430fe2-4389-7539-bf60-6b2a9a48ba74@googlemail.com>>:
> Current occurrence counts are "Kiev": 135e+6 > "Kyiv": 48e+6 > so that the frequencies of the two spellings are indeed not far > apart.
Although I do not think the numbers tell the full story, and generally speaking that they are not helpful for answering the question of whether we should switch when a change is made (as opposed to what spelling we should choose for a new identifier if a new time zone rule were needed), my understanding is that it's important to be pretty careful how you do these queries. For instance, it's generally judged necessary to exclude both "Chicken Kiev" (recipe) and "Dynamo Kyiv" (a football club) because both are effectively proper nouns that skew the results. But also that what you get back from Google depends on where you are in the world, and other factors.
And here, on this list, we should be clear about what these are. Are these Google search results from some particular location, and are they the estimates from the first page of results, or the more accurate counts from the final.
It may be more convincing to take a look at the Google Trends plot ("interest over time") linked from the Wikipedia sources page: https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?q=kiev,kyiv <https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?q=kiev,kyiv> It shows several crossovers recently with a projected line of Kyiv exceeding Kiev.
> I think that this is consistent with waiting for a majority for > Kyiv. My spelling checker knows "Kiev" but not "Kyiv".
This is an interesting point, to talk about dictionaries. Many of them are descriptive rather than prescriptive and often lag spoken and written language by years, sometimes by decades or scores of decades. And for computer word lists, there may be no practical method for updating them short of a massive operating system upgrade.
If I looked at my system, I shudder to think of the age of /usr/share/dict/words (which has neither, ha!), or even the ancient version of Microsoft Word.
I'd suggest dictionaries give us a very long time-constant view of these issue and that a time-constant measured in decades is probably not the right authority for our project to make this decision, but of course reasonable people can disagree! But, of course, in practice, spelling of proper nouns in computer spell-checkers is not a big deal.
Michael H Deckers via tz <tz@iana.org <mailto:tz@iana.org>> wrote on Fri, 27 Nov 2020 at 07:15:08 EST in <b5b423dc-2a65-6bb9-3b23-a0df8dc8f9b2@googlemail.com <mailto:b5b423dc-2a65-6bb9-3b23-a0df8dc8f9b2@googlemail.com>>: ... > It will take some time until "Kyiv" becomes the mainstream English > spelling -- one problem with it is that it is not clear how it > should be pronounced.
I'm not quite sure why pronunciation matters to us. I'll note, however, that there is considerable concern over the proper pronunciation of the city, and my understanding is that the obvious and common pronunciation of "Kiev" is regarded as incorrect. Consequently, if "Kyiv" introduces a little bit of friction on how to pronounce, that may in fact be a good thing and helpful in making English speakers question their pronunciation when it is worth questioning.
> What I find surprising is that this issue comes up so often. I hope > it is not a political issue with which tzdb should not be involved.
I'm not entirely sure what you mean, and I don't think this sort of ambiguous comment is helpful. Are you likening it to a situation where there are two warring groups who favor opposing spellings and the change has come about because one group has risen to power over the other, and our accepting the change would be like taking sides in a civil war, especially one that could change again quickly?
I think this becomes a very difficult question to analyze, because the differentiating {a conflict between two sides in a civil war} from {a decades-long conflict between two adjacent nations of unequal size and resources where one has a history of expansionism} may be more challenging than expected.
I think we can say with confidence that absent a major geopolitical shift, the current preference for Kyiv is very unlikely to change.
Jacob Pratt <jacob@jhpratt.dev <mailto:jacob@jhpratt.dev>> wrote on Fri, 27 Nov 2020 at 04:43:28 EST in <CAHbUps4dhgAMB918ggzLaRTxEw5=2TS2kiOmscme7nP38dvtoQ@mail.gmail.com <mailto:2TS2kiOmscme7nP38dvtoQ@mail.gmail.com>>:
> As has been stated by others, the listing should not be taken as something > to be displayed. The use of Kiev over Kyiv is well established in the tz > database. The fact that programmers do not use the CLDR as intended is not > the fault of the maintainers of the tz database.
The last is...not a fair claim. The tz database came long before CLDR and a time when Unix was centered on US English. It is not correct to say that the tz maintainers have had no responsibility for the way in which internationalization has occurred. We chose to use the identifier in the file system, and also to ignore the issue for a long time, and then to leverage CLDR for internationalization, rather than integrating such issues more tightly. This is not to say our choices were not reasonable or justified, but they were nonetheless our choices that contributed to the situation ("fault").
According to linked wkkipedia article, the use of the name Kyiv in English seems to have grown to become more widespread than it was when there were earlier discussions rejecting the change. It appears that it's woth to re-evaluate the case now.
John Hawkinson wrote in <20201127134218.GP62548@alum.mit.edu>: ... |I think this becomes a very difficult question to analyze, because \ |the differentiating {a conflict between two sides in a civil war} from \ |{a decades-long conflict between two adjacent nations of unequal size \ |and resources where one has a history of expansionism} may be more \ |challenging than expected. This region of the world has seen quite some of the latter in the last say two hundred years, .. but please do not respond to this, it is unnecessary, as i do not really wonder whether you could agree with that. |Jacob Pratt <jacob@jhpratt.dev> wrote on Fri, 27 Nov 2020 |at 04:43:28 EST in <CAHbUps4dhgAMB918ggzLaRTxEw5=2TS2kiOmscme7nP38dvtoQ@\ |mail.gmail.com>: | |> As has been stated by others, the listing should not be taken as \ |> something |> to be displayed. The use of Kiev over Kyiv is well established in the tz |> database. The fact that programmers do not use the CLDR as intended \ |> is not |> the fault of the maintainers of the tz database. | |The last is...not a fair claim. The tz database came long before CLDR \ The maintainer of TZ has spoken on this topic quite often, even after political pressure of distinguished courtesy, and he referred to the used methodology, the approach taken for realised renames in the past, in one of the many messages you did not quote. According to this (if i recall correctly) a rename is to be expected, but it will take some time. The problem is of course that the name is a subject of war, and fighters are focused on this war and are willing "to tear down the tent" to get their will at any cost. A good educator will likely wait until things have calmed down before an action is taken in this situation, wouldn't you agree with that? --steffen | |Der Kragenbaer, The moon bear, |der holt sich munter he cheerfully and one by one |einen nach dem anderen runter wa.ks himself off |(By Robert Gernhardt)
As a Wikipedia editor, I think Mr. Hawkinson should spend some time participating in the Wikipedia decision making process before trying to take in characterizing its inertia against change to others. I also question his claim that “major English-language authorities have all switched to Kyiv” without listing them. The English language doesn’t have official authorities, what constitutes a major English-language authority is subjective. As far as this group, I am not sure what the WSJ or AP does is particularly relevant. However, I think the decisions of English-language naming authorities, like the USGS Board on Geographical Names, and international authorities that designate things in English, like IATA and ICAO, are more relevant and they have gone to using Kyiv as the primary name. What are similar governmental and international authorities doing on this? alan
On Nov 26, 2020, at 06:07, John Hawkinson <jhawk@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
MAJOR CHANGE: It's interesting to me how badly we are, as a group, at having these discussions. We do not do a good job of introducing new people to the way we think about these issues, and we do not do a good job of assessing whether the ground under our feet has changed (it has!)
What Andriy's email did not explain is the rather significant change:
On Sept. 16, 2020, Wikipedia finally decided that the time had come and moved its page from Kiev to Kyiv. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Kyiv/Archive_7#Requested_move_28_August_2... It was summarized with:
| Rough consensus that "Kyiv" is the better title given usage in | reliable, English-language sources. An extended summary/rationale | prefaces the discussion. — Wug·a·po·des 06:58, 16 September 2020 | (UTC)
That decision was positively reviewed week later at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Move_review/Log/2020_September (you have to click the "show" button).
I'm not an expert in Wikipedia's decision-making processes, but I will say that about a year ago (Oct. 3, 2019), I made this prediction: "Because of its...unique project management challenges, I expect Wikipedia will probably be the last thing to switch. (cf. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Kiev/naming/Archive_14#The_time_has_come:...). I don't think we should wait that long."
Turns out I was wrong, Wikipedia switched before tz. Wikipedia, also, instituted a moratorium on these discussions; the last one was a year long, and so that's why this one come a year following our previous substantive discussion, after the Associated Press and the Wall Street Journal made changes.
So, it is probably time for us to take another look. I continue to support the change, and I think the objections offered are really just excuses. We wouldn't excuse an American racist anachronism in our database in the same way; perhaps this is not appropriately comparable, but I think it is not wrong to ask the question as to whether it is.
Specific comments:
Andriy: The tz project has long been aware of this issue, and the project leaders have felt that the English-language concensus remained Kiev, although they were aware of the clear preference of the Ukranian government and citizenry. So the question now is whether the English-language concensus has changed. It's clear that we should be looking at that once again.
Lester Caine: No one with a straight face can pretend that timezone identifiers are opauqe tags right now. And I think very few people could see a way to a transition where they are. In part because US-English-centered developers like working with the names as they are, and change is hard and frustrating and often counterproductive.
David Patte: Enshrining offensive anachronisms by changing our standard to be "if we made a mistake, we will never fix it" is politically unpalatable in almost every part of the world. I would find it politically unpalatable here. We are concerned about churn and "opening the floodgates" so we have made it hard to make changes, for good reason, but a system that is impossible to change is no good either.
I do think it's clear that the major English-language authorities have all switched to Kyiv. If our process is going to be to claim that we need to wait for the majority of written words to change over (e.g. based on Google search results, N-grams, etc.), I think we are setting an unreasonably high and unattainable target.
Kyiv has marshalled a political campaign to make this happen throughout the world in a way that it's difficult to imagine any other city doing, and it's very hard for me to see why we should substitute our judgement for that of all the authorities, be they formal political ones or simply major news sources and style guides. If this is not enough, what would ever be?
-- jhawk@alum.mit.edu John Hawkinson
Thank you for considering my question. I think in English the name of the city came from the Russian language due to historical features. Kiev - from Russian pronunciation. Kyiv - from Ukrainian pronunciation. The state language of Ukraine is the Ukrainian language. Most programmers show the original record from the database as Kiev when providing the time zone selection. And this leads to discussions. https://ua.usembassy.gov You can also find the correct inscription on the website of the US Embassy in Ukraine. In the contacts below. U.S. Embassy U.S. Embassy Kyiv <https://ua.usembassy.gov/embassy/kyiv/> 4 A.I. Sikorsky St. 04112 Kyiv, Ukraine Here https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/55-2010-п#Text you can see transliteration at the state level, if that helps. Maybe it's time to introduce multilingual support in your database? чт, 26 лист. 2020 о 18:44 Alan Perry <alanp@snowmoose.com> пише:
As a Wikipedia editor, I think Mr. Hawkinson should spend some time participating in the Wikipedia decision making process before trying to take in characterizing its inertia against change to others.
I also question his claim that “major English-language authorities have all switched to Kyiv” without listing them. The English language doesn’t have official authorities, what constitutes a major English-language authority is subjective.
As far as this group, I am not sure what the WSJ or AP does is particularly relevant. However, I think the decisions of English-language naming authorities, like the USGS Board on Geographical Names, and international authorities that designate things in English, like IATA and ICAO, are more relevant and they have gone to using Kyiv as the primary name. What are similar governmental and international authorities doing on this?
alan
On Nov 26, 2020, at 06:07, John Hawkinson <jhawk@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
MAJOR CHANGE: It's interesting to me how badly we are, as a group, at having these discussions. We do not do a good job of introducing new people to the way we think about these issues, and we do not do a good job of assessing whether the ground under our feet has changed (it has!)
What Andriy's email did not explain is the rather significant change:
On Sept. 16, 2020, Wikipedia finally decided that the time had come and moved its page from Kiev to Kyiv. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Kyiv/Archive_7#Requested_move_28_August_2... It was summarized with:
| Rough consensus that "Kyiv" is the better title given usage in | reliable, English-language sources. An extended summary/rationale | prefaces the discussion. — Wug·a·po·des 06:58, 16 September 2020 | (UTC)
That decision was positively reviewed week later at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Move_review/Log/2020_September (you have to click the "show" button).
I'm not an expert in Wikipedia's decision-making processes, but I will say that about a year ago (Oct. 3, 2019), I made this prediction: "Because of its...unique project management challenges, I expect Wikipedia will probably be the last thing to switch. (cf. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Kiev/naming/Archive_14#The_time_has_come:...). I don't think we should wait that long."
Turns out I was wrong, Wikipedia switched before tz. Wikipedia, also, instituted a moratorium on these discussions; the last one was a year long, and so that's why this one come a year following our previous substantive discussion, after the Associated Press and the Wall Street Journal made changes.
So, it is probably time for us to take another look. I continue to support the change, and I think the objections offered are really just excuses. We wouldn't excuse an American racist anachronism in our database in the same way; perhaps this is not appropriately comparable, but I think it is not wrong to ask the question as to whether it is.
Specific comments:
Andriy: The tz project has long been aware of this issue, and the project leaders have felt that the English-language concensus remained Kiev, although they were aware of the clear preference of the Ukranian government and citizenry. So the question now is whether the English-language concensus has changed. It's clear that we should be looking at that once again.
Lester Caine: No one with a straight face can pretend that timezone identifiers are opauqe tags right now. And I think very few people could see a way to a transition where they are. In part because US-English-centered developers like working with the names as they are, and change is hard and frustrating and often counterproductive.
David Patte: Enshrining offensive anachronisms by changing our standard to be "if we made a mistake, we will never fix it" is politically unpalatable in almost every part of the world. I would find it politically unpalatable here. We are concerned about churn and "opening the floodgates" so we have made it hard to make changes, for good reason, but a system that is impossible to change is no good either.
I do think it's clear that the major English-language authorities have all switched to Kyiv. If our process is going to be to claim that we need to wait for the majority of written words to change over (e.g. based on Google search results, N-grams, etc.), I think we are setting an unreasonably high and unattainable target.
Kyiv has marshalled a political campaign to make this happen throughout the world in a way that it's difficult to imagine any other city doing, and it's very hard for me to see why we should substitute our judgement for that of all the authorities, be they formal political ones or simply major news sources and style guides. If this is not enough, what would ever be?
-- jhawk@alum.mit.edu John Hawkinson
Andriy Ivanchenko said:
Thank you for considering my question. I think in English the name of the city came from the Russian language due to historical features. Kiev - from Russian pronunciation. Kyiv - from Ukrainian pronunciation. The state language of Ukraine is the Ukrainian language. Most programmers show the original record from the database as Kiev when providing the time zone selection. And this leads to discussions. https://ua.usembassy.gov You can also find the correct inscription on the website of the US Embassy in Ukraine. In the contacts below. U.S. Embassy U.S. Embassy Kyiv <https://ua.usembassy.gov/embassy/kyiv/> 4 A.I. Sikorsky St. 04112 Kyiv, Ukraine
Thank you. We are all too aware of this issue and at least some of the history behind it.
Here https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/55-2010-??#Text you can see transliteration at the state level, if that helps. Maybe it's time to introduce multilingual support in your database?
The time zone database is not the place for multilingual support or characters other than ASCII. There are other projects which do this, such as CLDR (http://cldr.unicode.org/translation/timezones). The names used in the time zone database are identifiers and long-term stability of these names is an important matter. It is not an absolute - such name changes have been made before - but it has significant technical implications and so such changes aren't done lightly. The names were originally chosen as a convenient way for the database maintainer to refer to various areas of the world that would change and were not intended for use in a public interface. Read the History file for much more on this. -- Clive D.W. Feather | If you lie to the compiler, Email: clive@davros.org | it will get its revenge. Web: http://www.davros.org | - Henry Spencer Mobile: +44 7973 377646
On Nov 27, 2020, at 1:19 AM, Clive D.W. Feather <clive@davros.org> wrote:
Andriy Ivanchenko said:
Here https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/55-2010-??#Text you can see transliteration at the state level, if that helps. Maybe it's time to introduce multilingual support in your database?
The time zone database is not the place for multilingual support or characters other than ASCII.
The Theory file: https://data.iana.org/time-zones/theory.html says, among other things: Here are the general guidelines used for choosing timezone names, in decreasing order of importance: * Use only valid POSIX file name components (i.e., the parts of names other than '/'). Do not use the file name components '.' and '..'. Within a file name component, use only ASCII letters, '.', '-' and '_'. Do not use digits, as that might create an ambiguity with POSIX TZ strings. A file name component must not exceed 14 characters or start with '-'. E.g., prefer Asia/Brunei to Asia/Bandar_Seri_Begawan. Exceptions: see the discussion of legacy names below. ... * Use mainstream English spelling, e.g., prefer Europe/Rome to Europa/Roma, and prefer Europe/Athens to the Greek Ευρώπη/Αθήνα or the Romanized Evrópi/Athína. The POSIX file name restrictions encourage this guideline.
There are other projects which do this, such as CLDR (http://cldr.unicode.org/translation/timezones).
Yes. If you want to, for example, provide a user interface to allow a user to choose the tzdb region for their machine, it should, at minimum, use the CLDR's name for the exemplar city. Ideally, it should provide a *choice* of cities, so, for example, somebody in Beijing doesn't have to choose Shanghai (whether in Simplified Chinese or in English or...), and somebody in San Francisco doesn't have to choose Los Angeles.
The names used in the time zone database are identifiers and long-term stability of these names is an important matter. It is not an absolute - such name changes have been made before
For example, Asia/Calcutta - Asia/Kolkata in March 2008.
On 2020-11-27 10:41, Guy Harris quoted theory.html:
* Use mainstream English spelling, e.g., prefer Europe/Rome to Europa/Roma, and prefer Europe/Athens to the Greek Ευρώπη/Αθήνα or the Romanized Evrópi/Athína. The POSIX file name restrictions encourage this guideline.
One should note that the change requests for "Kyiv" instead of "Kiev" are based on a new transliteration system into Latin script for Ukrainian toponyms and proper names that has been prescribed for legal documents by the Ukrainian government in 1996 and 2010. While this certainly makes "Kiev" incorrect in new legal texts, one cannot say that it makes "chicken Kiev" incorrect. It will take some time until "Kyiv" becomes the mainstream English spelling -- one problem with it is that it is not clear how it should be pronounced. What I find surprising is that this issue comes up so often. I hope it is not a political issue with which tzdb should not be involved. Michael Deckers.
I think you can find the answer to the pronunciation here https://translate.google.com.ua/#view=home&op=translate&sl=en&tl=uk&text=Kyi... . And you will hear how the name of the city sounds in Ukrainian. [y] like in bit. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Near-close_near-front_unrounded_vowel And Rossian https://translate.google.com.ua/#view=home&op=translate&sl=en&tl=ru&text=Kyi... . That's the difference. пт, 27 лист. 2020 о 14:15 Michael H Deckers < michael.h.deckers@googlemail.com> пише:
On 2020-11-27 10:41, Guy Harris quoted theory.html:
* Use mainstream English spelling, e.g., prefer Europe/Rome to
Europa/Roma, and prefer Europe/Athens to the Greek Ευρώπη/Αθήνα or the Romanized Evrópi/Athína. The POSIX file name restrictions encourage this guideline.
One should note that the change requests for "Kyiv" instead of "Kiev" are based on a new transliteration system into Latin script for Ukrainian toponyms and proper names that has been prescribed for legal documents by the Ukrainian government in 1996 and 2010.
While this certainly makes "Kiev" incorrect in new legal texts, one cannot say that it makes "chicken Kiev" incorrect. It will take some time until "Kyiv" becomes the mainstream English spelling -- one problem with it is that it is not clear how it should be pronounced.
What I find surprising is that this issue comes up so often. I hope it is not a political issue with which tzdb should not be involved.
Michael Deckers.
As has been stated by others, the listing should not be taken as something to be displayed. The use of Kiev over Kyiv is well established in the tz database. The fact that programmers do not use the CLDR as intended is not the fault of the maintainers of the tz database. Jacob Pratt On Fri, Nov 27, 2020, 03:58 Andriy Ivanchenko <ivanchenko.andriy@gmail.com> wrote:
Thank you for considering my question. I think in English the name of the city came from the Russian language due to historical features. Kiev - from Russian pronunciation. Kyiv - from Ukrainian pronunciation. The state language of Ukraine is the Ukrainian language. Most programmers show the original record from the database as Kiev when providing the time zone selection. And this leads to discussions. https://ua.usembassy.gov You can also find the correct inscription on the website of the US Embassy in Ukraine. In the contacts below. U.S. Embassy U.S. Embassy Kyiv <https://ua.usembassy.gov/embassy/kyiv/> 4 A.I. Sikorsky St. 04112 Kyiv, Ukraine
Here https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/55-2010-п#Text you can see transliteration at the state level, if that helps. Maybe it's time to introduce multilingual support in your database?
чт, 26 лист. 2020 о 18:44 Alan Perry <alanp@snowmoose.com> пише:
As a Wikipedia editor, I think Mr. Hawkinson should spend some time participating in the Wikipedia decision making process before trying to take in characterizing its inertia against change to others.
I also question his claim that “major English-language authorities have all switched to Kyiv” without listing them. The English language doesn’t have official authorities, what constitutes a major English-language authority is subjective.
As far as this group, I am not sure what the WSJ or AP does is particularly relevant. However, I think the decisions of English-language naming authorities, like the USGS Board on Geographical Names, and international authorities that designate things in English, like IATA and ICAO, are more relevant and they have gone to using Kyiv as the primary name. What are similar governmental and international authorities doing on this?
alan
On Nov 26, 2020, at 06:07, John Hawkinson <jhawk@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
MAJOR CHANGE: It's interesting to me how badly we are, as a group, at having these discussions. We do not do a good job of introducing new people to the way we think about these issues, and we do not do a good job of assessing whether the ground under our feet has changed (it has!)
What Andriy's email did not explain is the rather significant change:
On Sept. 16, 2020, Wikipedia finally decided that the time had come and moved its page from Kiev to Kyiv. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Kyiv/Archive_7#Requested_move_28_August_2... It was summarized with:
| Rough consensus that "Kyiv" is the better title given usage in | reliable, English-language sources. An extended summary/rationale | prefaces the discussion. — Wug·a·po·des 06:58, 16 September 2020 | (UTC)
That decision was positively reviewed week later at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Move_review/Log/2020_September (you have to click the "show" button).
I'm not an expert in Wikipedia's decision-making processes, but I will say that about a year ago (Oct. 3, 2019), I made this prediction: "Because of its...unique project management challenges, I expect Wikipedia will probably be the last thing to switch. (cf. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Kiev/naming/Archive_14#The_time_has_come:...). I don't think we should wait that long."
Turns out I was wrong, Wikipedia switched before tz. Wikipedia, also, instituted a moratorium on these discussions; the last one was a year long, and so that's why this one come a year following our previous substantive discussion, after the Associated Press and the Wall Street Journal made changes.
So, it is probably time for us to take another look. I continue to support the change, and I think the objections offered are really just excuses. We wouldn't excuse an American racist anachronism in our database in the same way; perhaps this is not appropriately comparable, but I think it is not wrong to ask the question as to whether it is.
Specific comments:
Andriy: The tz project has long been aware of this issue, and the project leaders have felt that the English-language concensus remained Kiev, although they were aware of the clear preference of the Ukranian government and citizenry. So the question now is whether the English-language concensus has changed. It's clear that we should be looking at that once again.
Lester Caine: No one with a straight face can pretend that timezone identifiers are opauqe tags right now. And I think very few people could see a way to a transition where they are. In part because US-English-centered developers like working with the names as they are, and change is hard and frustrating and often counterproductive.
David Patte: Enshrining offensive anachronisms by changing our standard to be "if we made a mistake, we will never fix it" is politically unpalatable in almost every part of the world. I would find it politically unpalatable here. We are concerned about churn and "opening the floodgates" so we have made it hard to make changes, for good reason, but a system that is impossible to change is no good either.
I do think it's clear that the major English-language authorities have all switched to Kyiv. If our process is going to be to claim that we need to wait for the majority of written words to change over (e.g. based on Google search results, N-grams, etc.), I think we are setting an unreasonably high and unattainable target.
Kyiv has marshalled a political campaign to make this happen throughout the world in a way that it's difficult to imagine any other city doing, and it's very hard for me to see why we should substitute our judgement for that of all the authorities, be they formal political ones or simply major news sources and style guides. If this is not enough, what would ever be?
-- jhawk@alum.mit.edu John Hawkinson
I understand correctly that you do not plan to change Kiev to Kyiv? Do I still have to wait a while for the final decision? I don't understand how your system works. Can you write about it in more detail? пт, 27 лист. 2020 о 10:58 Andriy Ivanchenko <ivanchenko.andriy@gmail.com> пише:
Thank you for considering my question. I think in English the name of the city came from the Russian language due to historical features. Kiev - from Russian pronunciation. Kyiv - from Ukrainian pronunciation. The state language of Ukraine is the Ukrainian language. Most programmers show the original record from the database as Kiev when providing the time zone selection. And this leads to discussions. https://ua.usembassy.gov You can also find the correct inscription on the website of the US Embassy in Ukraine. In the contacts below. U.S. Embassy U.S. Embassy Kyiv <https://ua.usembassy.gov/embassy/kyiv/> 4 A.I. Sikorsky St. 04112 Kyiv, Ukraine
Here https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/55-2010-п#Text you can see transliteration at the state level, if that helps. Maybe it's time to introduce multilingual support in your database?
чт, 26 лист. 2020 о 18:44 Alan Perry <alanp@snowmoose.com> пише:
As a Wikipedia editor, I think Mr. Hawkinson should spend some time participating in the Wikipedia decision making process before trying to take in characterizing its inertia against change to others.
I also question his claim that “major English-language authorities have all switched to Kyiv” without listing them. The English language doesn’t have official authorities, what constitutes a major English-language authority is subjective.
As far as this group, I am not sure what the WSJ or AP does is particularly relevant. However, I think the decisions of English-language naming authorities, like the USGS Board on Geographical Names, and international authorities that designate things in English, like IATA and ICAO, are more relevant and they have gone to using Kyiv as the primary name. What are similar governmental and international authorities doing on this?
alan
On Nov 26, 2020, at 06:07, John Hawkinson <jhawk@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
MAJOR CHANGE: It's interesting to me how badly we are, as a group, at having these discussions. We do not do a good job of introducing new people to the way we think about these issues, and we do not do a good job of assessing whether the ground under our feet has changed (it has!)
What Andriy's email did not explain is the rather significant change:
On Sept. 16, 2020, Wikipedia finally decided that the time had come and moved its page from Kiev to Kyiv. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Kyiv/Archive_7#Requested_move_28_August_2... It was summarized with:
| Rough consensus that "Kyiv" is the better title given usage in | reliable, English-language sources. An extended summary/rationale | prefaces the discussion. — Wug·a·po·des 06:58, 16 September 2020 | (UTC)
That decision was positively reviewed week later at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Move_review/Log/2020_September (you have to click the "show" button).
I'm not an expert in Wikipedia's decision-making processes, but I will say that about a year ago (Oct. 3, 2019), I made this prediction: "Because of its...unique project management challenges, I expect Wikipedia will probably be the last thing to switch. (cf. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Kiev/naming/Archive_14#The_time_has_come:...). I don't think we should wait that long."
Turns out I was wrong, Wikipedia switched before tz. Wikipedia, also, instituted a moratorium on these discussions; the last one was a year long, and so that's why this one come a year following our previous substantive discussion, after the Associated Press and the Wall Street Journal made changes.
So, it is probably time for us to take another look. I continue to support the change, and I think the objections offered are really just excuses. We wouldn't excuse an American racist anachronism in our database in the same way; perhaps this is not appropriately comparable, but I think it is not wrong to ask the question as to whether it is.
Specific comments:
Andriy: The tz project has long been aware of this issue, and the project leaders have felt that the English-language concensus remained Kiev, although they were aware of the clear preference of the Ukranian government and citizenry. So the question now is whether the English-language concensus has changed. It's clear that we should be looking at that once again.
Lester Caine: No one with a straight face can pretend that timezone identifiers are opauqe tags right now. And I think very few people could see a way to a transition where they are. In part because US-English-centered developers like working with the names as they are, and change is hard and frustrating and often counterproductive.
David Patte: Enshrining offensive anachronisms by changing our standard to be "if we made a mistake, we will never fix it" is politically unpalatable in almost every part of the world. I would find it politically unpalatable here. We are concerned about churn and "opening the floodgates" so we have made it hard to make changes, for good reason, but a system that is impossible to change is no good either.
I do think it's clear that the major English-language authorities have all switched to Kyiv. If our process is going to be to claim that we need to wait for the majority of written words to change over (e.g. based on Google search results, N-grams, etc.), I think we are setting an unreasonably high and unattainable target.
Kyiv has marshalled a political campaign to make this happen throughout the world in a way that it's difficult to imagine any other city doing, and it's very hard for me to see why we should substitute our judgement for that of all the authorities, be they formal political ones or simply major news sources and style guides. If this is not enough, what would ever be?
-- jhawk@alum.mit.edu John Hawkinson
On 27/11/2020 11:39, Andriy Ivanchenko wrote:
I understand correctly that you do not plan to change Kiev to Kyiv? Do I still have to wait a while for the final decision? I don't understand how your system works. Can you write about it in more detail?
One important thing to note here is that none of the historic material that uses the current 'long time stable' timezone identifiers is going to be changed since the identifiers where correct when that material was created. Indeed changing the archived material could well introduce other historically inaccurate problems, so the existing id's need to remain purely for historic reasons. This then requires the addition of 'new' id's for the same entries which results in a lot of duplication if every request for spelling changes and more often name changes is to be handled. It has been decided that it is tidier to retain the original id's since as has been reiterated by others these are not intended to be displayed, and a number of other services provide both translations and links to all the other unsupported location names. Programs resorting to using only the list of TZ identifiers are where the fault is and these should be taken to task for not providing a more user friendly interface in the language of the end user? There is no plan to change this since it is essential to maintain compatibility with historic material. -- Lester Caine - G8HFL ----------------------------- Contact - https://lsces.uk/wiki/Contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - https://lsces.uk Model Engineers Digital Workshop - https://medw.uk Rainbow Digital Media - https://rainbowdigitalmedia.uk
On 11/26/20 6:06 AM, John Hawkinson wrote:
Turns out I was wrong, Wikipedia switched before tz.
I'm not surprised, as Wikipedia is more aggressive about changing names, partly because they have fewer backward-compatibility concerns. There are billions of devices containing a copy of tzdb with lots of other software and documentation pointing at the names. Wikipedia doesn't have that problem. Also, I am leery of being influenced much by Wikipedia, as it's not a reliable source and name changes like this are due largely to internal Wikipedia politics. That being said, Wikipedia renamed its Calcutta page to Kolkata in 2005, three years before tzdb renamed Asia/Calcutta to Asia/Kolkata. If a similar schedule applied this time around, we'd rename Asia/Kiev in 2023. There are arguments for changing sooner (if only to lessen the number of emails to the list :-), and for later (as laziness is often a virtue in computing :-). I'm sure it will balance out somehow. PS. Andriy, I'm not sure whether you've seen the relevant commentary in the source code, which you can find here: https://github.com/eggert/tz/blob/271d9438bc43550672c4020352b0fdcea2822737/e... # As is usual in tzdb, Ukrainian zones use the most common English spellings. # For example, tzdb uses Europe/Kiev, as "Kiev" is the most common spelling in # English for Ukraine's capital, even though it is certainly wrong as a # transliteration of the Ukrainian "Київ". This is similar to tzdb's use of # Europe/Prague, which is certainly wrong as a transliteration of the Czech # "Praha". ("Kiev" came from old Slavic via Russian to English, and "Prague" # came from old Slavic via French to English, so the two cases have something # in common.) Admittedly English-language spelling of Ukrainian names is # controversial, and some day "Kyiv" may become substantially more popular in # English; in the meantime, stick with the traditional English "Kiev" as that # means less disruption for our users.
On 11/28/20 10:37 AM, Paul Eggert wrote:
If a similar schedule applied this time around, we'd rename Asia/Kiev in 2023.
I meant to write "Europe/Kiev" of course. Our naming problem could be worse. Suppose the the biggest city in Ukraine was not Kyiv / Kiev, but was instead Kropyvnytskyi / Inhulsk / Kirovohrad / Kirovograd / Kirovo / Zinovievsk / Zinovyevsk / Elysavet / Yelisavetgrad / Yelysavethrad / Elisavetgrad / Elizabethgrad / ...? See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kropyvnytskyi#Name_origins That city's official name changed most recently in 2016, but Google suggests "Kirovograd" is still the most common English-language spelling. This means English-language spelling is trailing official spelling by two or three official name-changes now (the uncertainty depending on which "official" one is referring to). I mention this not because of any imminent effort to create a Zone called Europe/Kropyvnytskyi, but because it's an extreme case of city name changes that, if it were to become more common in the future, could pose a real challenge to how tzdb is maintained.
Changing the names of cities is part of the policy of decommunization in Ukraine. Yes, it is politics. I think the names you use do not free your base from political influence. It might be easier to specify political centers as coordinates on the ground. The coordinates of political centers change less often. Then it would exempt from renaming. And you would only worry about the coordinates of political centers. And then each territory could choose the necessary geographical coordinates and thus indicate affiliation to the time zone. But is it possible to free such a base from politics? As an option: 1 | 50 27 '30 30' | timezone +2 сб, 28 лист. 2020 о 21:19 Paul Eggert <eggert@cs.ucla.edu> пише:
If a similar schedule applied this time around, we'd rename Asia/Kiev in
On 11/28/20 10:37 AM, Paul Eggert wrote: 2023.
I meant to write "Europe/Kiev" of course.
Our naming problem could be worse. Suppose the the biggest city in Ukraine was not Kyiv / Kiev, but was instead Kropyvnytskyi / Inhulsk / Kirovohrad / Kirovograd / Kirovo / Zinovievsk / Zinovyevsk / Elysavet / Yelisavetgrad / Yelysavethrad / Elisavetgrad / Elizabethgrad / ...? See:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kropyvnytskyi#Name_origins
That city's official name changed most recently in 2016, but Google suggests "Kirovograd" is still the most common English-language spelling. This means English-language spelling is trailing official spelling by two or three official name-changes now (the uncertainty depending on which "official" one is referring to).
I mention this not because of any imminent effort to create a Zone called Europe/Kropyvnytskyi, but because it's an extreme case of city name changes that, if it were to become more common in the future, could pose a real challenge to how tzdb is maintained.
If this is somehow important for the further development of this topic, then I withdraw my request to change the name of Kyiv.
On 2020-11-26 19:27:30 (+0800), Andriy Ivanchenko wrote:
What do I need to do for you to make such changes? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KyivNotKiev Are such changes possible?
I'm generally in the knee-jerk "keep our identifiers stable" camp. Insert the usual paragraph about CLDR and such. However. Given that even the English language Wikipedia has changed though, perhaps it is time to consider doing a Calcutta on Kiev (or a Kolkata on Kyiv). I don't think we need to duplicate the Wikipedia effort to research whether Kyiv is now the more dominant spelling in English. I am happy to take their word for it. Philip -- Philip Paeps Senior Reality Engineer Alternative Enterprises
On 2020-11-27 17:52, Philip Paeps wrote:
On 2020-11-26 19:27:30 (+0800), Andriy Ivanchenko wrote:
What do I need to do for you to make such changes? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KyivNotKiev Are such changes possible?
I'm generally in the knee-jerk "keep our identifiers stable" camp. Insert the usual paragraph about CLDR and such.
However.
Given that even the English language Wikipedia has changed though, perhaps it is time to consider doing a Calcutta on Kiev (or a Kolkata on Kyiv).
I don't think we need to duplicate the Wikipedia effort to research whether Kyiv is now the more dominant spelling in English. I am happy to take their word for it.
How often do you change database keys when someone wants to change how something is labelled? Leave the identifiers/keys alone and leave it to localization packages to provide the labels. Wikipedia and other political organizations changing all occurrences may be the reason the web search results change. English readers/speakers are a lot more conservative and the names being used during the Crimean war and WWI will still be more recognizable, common, and current for decades, except for those with political or other interests in the region, and that now includes subscribers to this list. -- Take care. Thanks, Brian Inglis, Calgary, Alberta, Canada This email may be disturbing to some readers as it contains too much technical detail. Reader discretion is advised. [Data in binary units and prefixes, physical quantities in SI.]
On 2020-11-29 05:20:45 (+0800), Brian Inglis wrote:
On 2020-11-27 17:52, Philip Paeps wrote:
On 2020-11-26 19:27:30 (+0800), Andriy Ivanchenko wrote:
What do I need to do for you to make such changes? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KyivNotKiev Are such changes possible?
I'm generally in the knee-jerk "keep our identifiers stable" camp. Insert the usual paragraph about CLDR and such.
However.
Given that even the English language Wikipedia has changed though, perhaps it is time to consider doing a Calcutta on Kiev (or a Kolkata on Kyiv).
I don't think we need to duplicate the Wikipedia effort to research whether Kyiv is now the more dominant spelling in English. I am happy to take their word for it.
How often do you change database keys when someone wants to change how something is labelled?
The only two renames I can remember are Calcutta -> Kolkata in 2008 and Godthab -> Nuuk in 2020. Even if we rename Kiev -> Kyiv sooner rather than later, I don't think there's any risk of being seen to be cavalier about the stability of our identifiers...
Leave the identifiers/keys alone and leave it to localization packages to provide the labels.
As a general guiding principle, I completely agree with this. However, while our identifiers should be stable, they can't be completely immutable. We should not rush to rename identifiers when places change names (see also Paul's example elsewhere in this thread about a city in Ukraine that's been renamed several times in recent years). On the other hand, we shouldn't be clinging to the past either. The identifier we grew up spelling Kiev, future maintainers and contributors will have always spelled Kyiv.
Wikipedia and other political organizations changing all occurrences may be the reason the web search results change. English readers/speakers are a lot more conservative and the names being used during the Crimean war and WWI will still be more recognizable, common, and current for decades, except for those with political or other interests in the region, and that now includes subscribers to this list.
It is true that there is a lot more noise about this than for previous renames that have affected the tzdb. I don't think there is any value in speculating why. Aside from the noise on the mailing list though, I think the writing is on the wall (pardon the expression) for the way we spell Kyiv. Philip -- Philip Paeps Senior Reality Engineer Alternative Enterprises
participants (22)
-
Alan Perry -
Andrew Gierth -
Andriy Ivanchenko -
Brian Inglis -
Clive D.W. Feather -
David Patte -
Guy Harris -
Jacob Pratt -
John Alvord -
John Hawkinson -
John Haxby -
Lester Caine -
Matt Johnson-Pint -
Michael H Deckers -
Paul Eggert -
Paul Ganssle -
Paul Gilmartin -
Paul Goyette -
Paw Boel Nielsen -
Phake Nick -
Philip Paeps -
Steffen Nurpmeso