From owner-freebsd-current Sat Nov 23 12:07:55 1996 Return-Path: owner-current Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id MAA10990 for current-outgoing; Sat, 23 Nov 1996 12:07:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from veda.is (ubiq.veda.is [193.4.230.60]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id MAA10980 for ; Sat, 23 Nov 1996 12:07:51 -0800 (PST) Received: (from adam@localhost) by veda.is (8.8.3/8.7.3) id UAA18813; Sat, 23 Nov 1996 20:09:41 GMT From: Adam David Message-Id: <199611232009.UAA18813@veda.is> Subject: Re: Can anyone explain...? In-Reply-To: <9611231832.AA04161@halloran-eldar.lcs.mit.edu> from Garrett Wollman at "Nov 23, 96 01:32:44 pm" To: wollman@lcs.mit.edu (Garrett Wollman) Date: Sat, 23 Nov 1996 20:09:37 +0000 (GMT) Cc: joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de, freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL28 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-current@FreeBSD.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > > It would be worth keeping MET for backward compatibility? > > CET does make better sense though as the standard name. > > That doesn't make any sense. A timezone only has a single set of > abbreviations. Unless you wanted to create an alternative set of > timezone data files, the only difference in which was that some > European countries have a different abbreviation? Gack. OK sorry for the detour, I had wrongly assumed that several names could point to the same zone sector. CET is still the obvious choice, but then how shall any sense be made of "MET"? -- Adam David