tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6193377.post6085038118010205062..comments2010-05-03T11:44:01.620+02:00Rainer Gerhardshttps://profiles.google.com/112402185904751517878noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6193377.post-92079683534762760922010-02-06T11:58:04.132+01:002010-02-06T11:58:04.132+01:00Hi Steve,<br /><br />I agree that the situation is confused. But we decided to leave out leap seconds for the reason I quoted. Granted, this may not be inline with international agreements, we saw that supporting leap seconds would cause large grief. For example, you usually can not store timestamps with leap seconds into databases - they will reject that format. As I wrote, I think this is a good compromise, especially assuming the OS supports leap seconds by letting time running somewhat slower to accommodate for them (the typical approach).<br /><br />RainerRainerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12765720626924376847noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6193377.post-29359510223784248642010-02-06T00:41:12.982+01:002010-02-06T00:41:12.982+01:00Undeniably the situation is confused, but until there is a substantial pronouncement otherwise, current international agreements <a href="http://www.ucolick.org/~sla/leapsecs/epochtime.html" rel="nofollow">demand that the time scale called UTC have leap seconds</a>. There are several ways out of this, but no clear progress toward any of them.Steve Allenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02390599836623957502noreply@blogger.com