[LEAPSECS] The relation between calendars and leap seconds.

Clive D.W. Feather clive at demon.net
Wed Nov 12 04:44:22 EST 2008


Poul-Henning Kamp said:

> Another issue is that exception rules should not trigger so seldom

> that people forget about them.

>

> Again the 400 year rule is exhibit number 1, and exhibit number two

> could be how Sweden failed to follow their own established rules,

> trying to recover from the old to the new calendar.


With two-bis being the misinterpretation of "every four years" in the
Julian calendar, so that Feb 29th was added every *three* years for some
time (Wikipedia suggests the most likely sequence was 44, 41, 38, 35, 32,
29, 26, 23, 20, 17, 14, 11, 8 BC, then a hiatus to correct the problem,
then AD 4, 8, 12 etc.).

--
Clive D.W. Feather | Work: <clive at demon.net> | Tel: +44 20 8495 6138
Internet Expert | Home: <clive at davros.org> | Fax: +44 870 051 9937
Demon Internet | WWW: http://www.davros.org | Mobile: +44 7973 377646
THUS - a Cable and Wireless business


More information about the LEAPSECS mailing list