Brooks Harris wrote: >Yes, I understand that. Perhaps using the word "origin" was careless. >Maybe you can suggest a better term.
"proleptic". You may usefully add "with astronomical year numbering" to make clear that zero and negative year numbers are valid. But really, when you're defining a time scale, the calendar is irrelevant. It's a separate concern that should be addressed separately. >Of course the idea is that dates after 1972-01-01T00:00:00Z are >"earth corrected" (Leap Seconds). Are you implying that dates before are not? That wouldn't be a proleptic UTC. -zefram _______________________________________________ LEAPSECS mailing list LEAPSECS@leapsecond.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs
