[LEAPSECS] What's the point?
seaman at noao.edu
Wed Feb 9 14:29:23 EST 2011
Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> What "authority" would that be, and what powers would it have ?
Per SERVICE INTERNATIONAL DE LA ROTATION TERRESTRE ET DES SYSTEMES DE REFERENCE, we know that:
"NO positive leap second will be introduced at the end of June 2011."
> I don't need to remind you, that nobody would be surprised if the vote fails in ITU-R
I'd be surprised. They haven't shown much sense yet.
> and USA then throw the toys out of the pram and declares that they will discontinue leap-seconds anyway.
...but I'd be gobsmacked if the USA (whatever that means) acted unilaterally in that eventuality.
There literally is no hurry. This is a completely manufactured crisis. Factions in the USA disagree about the issues.
> Yeah, it wouldn't be pretty, but neither are engineering drawings in two units of measurements.
"Pretty" isn't the primary goal of engineering. "Optimal" isn't even the goal. Engineering is an exercise in satisficing to meet requirements. Seeking consensus in advance of decision-making is the most efficient way to go about it. Expending a little effort to actually discover the requirements is even more fundamental.
More information about the LEAPSECS