On 2025-05-15 16:00, Doug Ewell via tz wrote:
Tim Parenti replied to Sorel Si:
The zone in question was moved from the 'europe' file to 'backzone' in
release 2022d and, as such, is no longer referenced in the 'zone*.tab'
files.
...
Any remaining references to Europe/Uzhgorod exist for backwards-
compatibility purposes only. In almost all cases, Europe/Kyiv should
be used instead.
There’s another problem, though. The tz database is not a gazetteer or other
official reference to the “correct” spelling of city names. The identifiers in
the tz database are not meant to be presented directly to users as part of a UI.
Rather, tzids are internal identifiers, sort of like variable names or URLs or
API endpoints. They are intended to be stable. When you change one, you create
an incompatibility with systems that expect the old name.
The theory file says to “Use mainstream English spelling” in place names, which
often leads to requests like this on the basis that the locally preferred
spelling or transliteration must automatically be the mainstream English
spelling. That’s not reality. It takes time for another government’s preference
to take hold in English usage—we still don’t really use “Czechia” in the US,
and might never do so—but even if and when it finally does, the stability
problem remains.
Although the full tz database includes a system of links, such that clients
looking for an old tzid can have it automagically mapped to the new one, there
are systems out there that don’t use this mechanism. They look up the names
directly, or they provide mappings between tzids and time zone names used by
other systems. (CLDR is an example of this.) When a tzid is changed, it breaks
the client, at least until the maintainers of the client get a chance to react
with an update.
The theory file goes on to say, “If a name is changed, put its old spelling in
the 'backward' file as a link to the new spelling. This means old spellings
will continue to work.” This is great for clients that understand ‘backward’
and linking, but breaks the others. I would prefer to see the administrative
policy changed in the opposite direction that Sorel has in mind, making the
_new_ spellings the aliases, and keeping the existing identifiers stable for
systems that need that stability.
(Lest there be any misunderstanding, this has nothing to do with being
pro-Ukraine or pro-Russia.)
A couple of other factors ignored by those promoting identifer changes:
- script transliteration rules from other alphabets/abjabs to Latin scripts give
zero consideration to pronunciation rules in other languages, and lack of any
accents in English, nor variations in those across the different cultures in
which the language is embedded
- outside of technical and diplomatic circles, there is little to no interest or
dissemination of such matters, and about zero impact on the general population;
most of which no longer pay to read paper or online media, may not have access
to or watch broadcast television news services, and pay to access only what
interests or amuses them. This may well apply to many of us, more to younger
folks, whose exposure may be more limited to the contents of free social media
platforms they sample.
So "mainstream English spelling" may take generations to change and vary with
the culture: some common usages in mainstream media seem anachronistic to me.
--
Take care. Thanks, Brian Inglis Calgary, Alberta, Canada
La perfection est atteinte Perfection is achieved
non pas lorsqu'il n'y a plus rien à ajouter not when there is no more to add
mais lorsqu'il n'y a plus rien à retrancher but when there is no more to cut
-- Antoine de Saint-Exupéry
