"Poul-Henning Kamp" <p...@phk.freebsd.dk> wrote: |-------- |In message <20150123123330.llbzydw5%sdao...@yandex.com>, Steffen \ |Nurpmeso write |s: |>|Bulletin C is issued whether or not a leap second occasion \ |>|(currently June and December, but could be any month) corresponds \ |>|to an actual leap second. The encoding (as in PHK’s example) \ |>|should be able to represent a positive, negative or absent leap second. |> |>That doesn't make sense to me. An absent leap second doesn't |>change the TAI-UTC drift, so why would you update the record? |>Shall an announcment be taken back for whatever reason, the old |>record had to be restored. | |It's the difference between "have not been told that X will happen" |and "have been told that X will not happen."
Ok, if the RR is meant as a regular distribution service for the IERS information then that would make absolutely sense to me. --steffen _______________________________________________ LEAPSECS mailing list LEAPSECS@leapsecond.com https://pairlist6.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs
