See also https://www.unicode.org/reports/tr35/dev/tr35-dates.html#Using_Time_Zone_Names
As to “Alberta time”, outside of where local abbreviations are available, the generic location name may be used. Examples at https://st.unicode.org/cldr-apps/v#r_zones/da// (These are examples, not production data). “ Edmonton-tid” which I think is “Edmonton time” -s Enviado desde mi iPad > El oct 6, 2026, a la(s) 6:44 p.m., Paul Eggert via tz <[email protected]> escribió: > > On 2026-10-06 12:19, Robert Bastian wrote: >> The changes linked above effectively ignore TZDB's decision to model these >> changes as new standard times. > > Thanks for explaining. Some more comments plus a couple of questions. > > As I understand it, after November 1 neither CLDR nor TZDB will use the > English-language abbreviations suggested by the respective regional > governments. For the new timekeeping we have: > > 0 1 2 3 > -07 MST PDT PCT America/Vancouver > -06 CST MDT ABT America/Edmonton > -06 CST MDT ??? America/Inuvik > -05 EST CDT MBT America/Winnipeg > > where column 0 is the UT offset, column 1 is the abbreviation that TZDB will > use, column 2 is what CLDR will use, and column 3 is what the respective > governments suggest (NWT does not suggest so I listed "???".) > > This disagreement is unfortunate but I don't see a simple solution other than > maybe just going with column 0 in TZDB for now. Although columns 1 and 2 are > both compatible with a lot of existing software and standards (e.g., Internet > RFC 5322), neither column is likely to match what people will say; and > although column 3 attempts to avoid that confusion it is at the expense of > compatibility and it regionalizes abbreviations in a way that will likely > have significant problems. > > I don't see anything in bleeding-edge CLDR mentioning "ABT" or "Alberta > Time", or similarly for the other government-suggested abbreviations or > names, so it looks like CLDR is also holding off on column 3 for now. Will > this month's new CLDR stick with the name "Mountain Daylight Time" for > Alberta's timekeeping, and will it allow "Mountain Time" as a generic name > for this new timekeeping even though Alberta doesn't have alternatives for > summer and winter? And what will CLDR do for "Mountain Standard Time" in > Alberta - will that string be forbidden in Alberta, or never generated? Or am > I misreading the tables again? > > Also, it seems the phrase "Pacific Time" is uniquely problematic here, as it > exactly matches the legal name for -07 in BC whereas CLDR uses it as a > generic name for both -08 and -07. We won't have this problem with "Manitoba > Time" and "Alberta Time", though we will have other problems.
