Tom Van Baak said: >> Does your proposal allow for a Zero leap second > Nope, LSEM avoids the zero leap second situation. That's the idea: to always > have a leap second. Either an add or a delete, at the end of every month. The > beauty is that it wouldn't violate how UTC is already defined. Leap seconds > would become a monthly normal instead of a rare event; that is, a regular > pain in the ass instead of an exceptional pain in the ass [1].
A problem is that each year requires either a zero change or a 2 or 4 second change. Not one second per year. -- Clive D.W. Feather | If you lie to the compiler, Email: cl...@davros.org | it will get its revenge. Web: http://www.davros.org | - Henry Spencer Mobile: +44 7973 377646 _______________________________________________ LEAPSECS mailing list LEAPSECS@leapsecond.com https://pairlist6.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs
