Re: Inspiration for a better calendar package?

[Wilhelm Spickermann <jwos.20.unbenutzbar@spamgourmet.com>]

Dennis Lee Bieber wrote:

>> The resolution of "one nominial minute" (_not_ a physical
>> unit) for wall clock time was chosen, because it's the finest
>> usable resultion. We can tell that we have 4 nominal minutes
>> between 31-dec-2044 23:59:58 and 01-jan-2045 00:00:02. But we
>> cannot express this difference in seconds (or in the physical
>> unit "one minute"). We will hopefully be able to do that in
>> summer 2044 or perhaps earlier, when the leap seconds are
>> eliminated.
>>
> Pardon? 23:59:58 incrementing to 00:00:02 is a change of four
> SECONDS, not minutes.

OOps, sorry. I should have used 31-dec-2044 23:58 and 01-jan-2045
00:02.

But it is not four seconds, it is three, four or five seconds,
depending on yet unknown leap second decisions.

Wilhelm