In message <20140114103334.gv21...@fysh.org>, Zefram writes: >Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: >>They chose UTC because they meant UTC. >... >>The reason why they didn't cater to leap-seconds ? >> >>They hadn't heard about them at the time. > >It's dubious to say that they meant UTC if they weren't aware of >leap seconds. As that's the defining feature of UTC [...]
No. The defining feature of UTC is the bit they put in the name: Coordinated. To everybody else but the scientists who tickled the atomic clocks, leap seconds was an academic detail of no consequence. UTC being Coordinated was a The Big Deal, and the *only* reason why CCITT ever got involved in timescales: Telcos needed to schedule and bill across national borders. Some of you guys should really have gotten more out into reality in the 1970'ies and 1980'ies if you think people cared about or for leapseconds. -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 p...@freebsd.org | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence. _______________________________________________ LEAPSECS mailing list LEAPSECS@leapsecond.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs
