On 2017-11-26 23:29, Steve Allen wrote:
At the 2015 WRC the general assembly seemed to admit that the folks pushing to abandon leap seconds had not done their homework. In the interim the news has been thin, but there are some good clues that the homework is being done. The clearest of all these comes directly from the BIPM itself and gives a timeline of many things that have been happening and will be happening https://www.bipm.org/cc/PARTNERS/Allowed/2016_October/5-Decision-of-the-WRC-2015-on-the-leap-second.pdf Folks who are editing the wikipedia page on the leap second process may wish to review this as citable evidence of what is happening. This lays out that the BIPM watched the CCTF create a task group under the Working Group on TAI (WGTAI). The Task Group on Time Scale Definitions (TGTSD) first met 2016-09-28. Much, more, this lays out the timeline as seen from the BIPM. The TGTSD submitted a report to the CCTF meeting 2017-06-08/09. That approved a recommendation sent to the CIPM 2017-10/11 which might have approved a recommendation to be sent to CGPM 2018.
Thanks for the info! While the ITU actions are difficult to follow by outsiders, BIPM actions are more easily visible. I find it most relevant that the BIPM seems to intend to make leap seconds a topic in the next CGPM in 2018-11. See http://www.bipm.org/cc/PARTNERS/Allowed /2017_October/Plans-for-the-26th-CGPM-M-MILTON.pdf The CGPM is similarly influential as the WRC on the international level, they have have ties with the OIML, and they are probably more metrology-oriented than the ITU. Michael Deckers. _______________________________________________ LEAPSECS mailing list LEAPSECS@leapsecond.com https://pairlist6.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs
