On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 6:58 PM, Nero Imhard <n...@pipe.nl> wrote: > So here's a proposal for making UTC more workable in the long run: let's > alternate positive > and negative leap seconds! Each year should have at least two
> Somewhow I can't imagine mine is a novel idea. Hi Nero, Yes, it's similar to Tom Van Baak's proposal for a "Leap Second Every Month" (positive or negative) that he sent out in November and generated some discussion (http://six.pairlist.net/pipermail/leapsecs/2010-November/001813.html) which was close to Ed Davies's proposal in 2003 (http://www.ucolick.org/~sla/navyls/0197.html). I haven't followed the official debate much over the last five years (not that it was particularly followable anyway), but as of 2005 I doubt this would have satisfied the American delegation's concerns about safety and the inconvenience of leap seconds. Best, Keith _______________________________________________ LEAPSECS mailing list LEAPSECS@leapsecond.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs
