Re: Assumptions ...
> Whether you choose to consider 23:59:60Z part of 23:59Z or not isThere's actually only one very long shelf. On second thought, ISO 8601
> irrelevant. It is represented as such when using Zulu time, which is
> all that matters. It's on the same shelf as the other seconds in this
mentions at least two: one for UTC and one for UT1. The leap seconds
(and days?) are used in an effort to keep the two in sync.
> UTC was not created by ISO. ITU-R is responsible for the definitionBut do any of those bodies document exactly whether or not the second
> of UTC. Physically, UTC is maintained by BIPM and leap seconds are
> determined by IERS.
belongs to the minute? And if so, does ISO 8601 reference such a
document, even if non-normatvely?
> I'm still wondering how negative leap seconds are possible, if hoursYeah, that's pretty much where my arguments hit a wall (so I've avoided
> and minutes can never vary.
In order for that to work (and it wouldn't) there is no T23:59:59Z that
day (as stated, it's omitted), so for the minute T23:59Z to have sixty
seconds it must borrow T24:00:00Z (T00:00:00Z from the following day).
The T00:00:00Z in question therefore belongs to _both_ minutes...
ummm... which shouldn't be allowed. But at least balance would be
preserved, a positive leap second belongs to no minute and a negative
leap second belongs to two.
- --- In ISO8601@yahoogroups.com, "piebaldconsult" <PIEBALDconsult@...>
> I really thought someone would point out that "two groups of Borg" isNot really. Although they share a collective consciousness, or
> an oxymoron.
whatever, they are made up of individual units, which are organized
into adjuncts, unimatrices, cubes, etc. It is possible to be situated
between two borg cubes, or merely between two groups of borgs coming
from opposite directions.