Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: [ISO8601] Leap second announcement

Expand Messages
  • Klaus Schmid
    ... On http://www.ucolick.org/~sla/leapsecs/onlinebib.html I found two other interesting dates: 2005-11-08/11: ITU-R WP7A, Geneva
    Message 1 of 6 , Jul 15, 2005
      Fred Bone wrote:
      It might also be the last. Moves are afoot to redefine the relationship
      between UTC and UT1. If accepted, then from 2007-12-21T00:00(*) UTC would
      no longer be kept within 0.9s of UT1; the limit would become 1h, which
      should see most of us out ...
      
      (*) No, I don't know why this date was chosen.
      
      
        
      On  http://www.ucolick.org/~sla/leapsecs/onlinebib.html  I found two other interesting dates:
      2005-11-08/11: ITU-R WP7A, Geneva
      The next meeting of ITU-R Working Party 7A has no agenda yet. It is becoming clear that the presentations and events at this meeting will be relevant to changes in ITU-R TF.460-6. This will almost certainly be the meeting which makes the final internal recommendation to the ITU-R regarding the fate of leap seconds in UTC.
      2007-10-08/11-02: ITU-R World Radiocommunication Conference (WRC-07)
      Changes to ITU-R recommendations might be made at this meeting. As indicated above it appears that efforts to revise ITU-R TF.460-6 are being made in preparation for submission to this conference for approval. Note that the effective date of the end of leap seconds apparently being proposed by the United States is 2007-12-21 which is less than two months after the conference.
      -- Klaus
    • John Steele
      Fred Bone wrote:It might also be the last. Moves are afoot to redefine the relationship between UTC and UT1. If accepted, then from
      Message 2 of 6 , Jul 15, 2005
        Fred Bone <fred.bone@...> wrote:
        It might also be the last. Moves are afoot to redefine the relationship
        between UTC and UT1. If accepted, then from 2007-12-21T00:00(*) UTC would
        no longer be kept within 0.9s of UT1; the limit would become 1h, which
        should see most of us out ...

        (*) No, I don't know why this date was chosen.

         
        I knew there were proposals for change, but it has been very hard to find out anything about them. It is apparently a small group working on it, that seems little interested in other opinions. Found this page which has a number of links to what little info there is, if anyone is interested.
      • NGUYEN Ivy
        Maybe it was chosen because it is the December solstice? I still wonder about why 2007, though. One hour sounds like too much of a difference to let UT1 & UTC
        Message 3 of 6 , Jul 15, 2005
          Maybe it was chosen because it is the December solstice? I still
          wonder about why 2007, though. One hour sounds like too much of a
          difference to let UT1 & UTC stay out-of-sync to me.

          On 15/07/05, Fred Bone <fred.bone@...> wrote:
          > On 15 Jul 2005 at 17:32, ISO8601@yahoogroups.com said:
          >
          >
          > It might also be the last. Moves are afoot to redefine the relationship
          > between UTC and UT1. If accepted, then from 2007-12-21T00:00(*) UTC would
          > no longer be kept within 0.9s of UT1; the limit would become 1h, which
          > should see most of us out ...
          >
          > (*) No, I don't know why this date was chosen.
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.