[LEAPSECS] final report of the UK leap seconds dialog

[Tom Van Baak]

> Many aspects of "local time" or "civil time" are left to "common 
> practice" which is not good enough to expect uniform inter-operable 
> implementations.

Brooks, can you give some examples?

> We here concentrate on discussions of UTC and Leap 
> Seconds, which is foundational, yet obviously "local time" is required 
> and there's nearly a complete lack of standards that govern it.

I'm surprised to hear this. A "complete lack of standards", really? What, in your opinion, would a complete set of standards look like?

> Fixing
> Leap Seconds, either by more clearly defining it so implementations can 
> get it right (my very strong preference)

What do you mean by "get it right"? Is there an error in the specification or is there a flaw in the implementation? Is there only one true implementation? When an implementation does not "get it right", is the root cause an error in the definition, or in the clarity of the definition, or something else?

> or ceasing Leap Seconds (which 
> some hope will mitigate the problems but I believe will make it worse) 
> doesn't address the elephant in the room - local time.

How would ceasing leap seconds affect your world of video time codes?

/tvb