On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 6:23 PM, Paul Gilmartin <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mon, 8 Nov 2010 16:27:09 -0600, Mike Schwab wrote: >> >>What I would like to see, but I doubt it would ever be implemented, >>would be like the Leap Second rule. If you need to drop a second, you >>skip the last second of June 30 or December 31. If you need to add a >>second, you have another second at the end of June 30 or December 31, >>enumberated as 23:59:60. For falling back, instead of repeating the >>hour from 01:00 to 02:00, extend the 1 oclock and 2 oclock hour from >>60 minutes to 90 minutes. 0000-0059, 0100-0189, 0200-0289, 0300-0359. >>On an manually set clock change during the time change, you let the >>clock run to 30 minutes past the hour during minutes 60-89, set it >>back 30 minutes, let it run for 90 minutes for the 00-89 minutes, and >>set the clock back another 30 minutes. >> > Ummm. You distribute it over 2 hours in order not to need to > deal with a 3-digit minute? Could you get the keepers of Civil > Time to sign off on this scheme? > > There remains a concern of how much it would break otherwise. > Notice, for example that the z/OS leap second support idles > down for a second in order that users (and the TIME function > need lot deal with the 23:59:60.hh) > > -- gil Even better than 2 extra half hour would be to add hour 25 at the end of Saturday instead of waiting for 2am to set the clock back to 1am. Let the clock run to 1am and set it back to midnight. The best solution of all is to keep everything in GMT and translate.
-- Mike A Schwab, Springfield IL USA Where do Forest Rangers go to get away from it all? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
