On Fri, 13 Aug 2010 18:48:55 +0000, john gilmore wrote: > >The obvious epoch origin to use is that for CE and BCE dates, viz., 0000 >December 31 of the Gregorian calendar. Other epoch origins can then be >supported simply using a table of displacements. > That would be a proleptic Gregorian calendar? > >Practices different from the one I have just summarized very briefly are >common, but they are indefensible. > E.g. ISPF's storing PDS member dates in a display-oriented format.
Local time or Greenwich time? Sooner or later, the variability in the earth's rotation will matter. UTC is already 34 seconds behind TAI. -- gil ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
