WFC: Year-2000 issue

[Steve Allen]

Arnold Rots wrote:
> The only issue not addressed is that of the calendar.  What are the
> arguments against mandating Gregorian calendar?  If its solves
> ambiguities without placing undue restrictions, I would not object
> to such a mandate.

All _telescopic_ data have been acquired since the initial epoch of
the Gregorian calendar.  The majority of photographic data have been
acquired at sites employing the Gregorian Calendar.  This permits
Galileo's notebooks to be scanned and wrapped in FITS headers without
modifying the original dates.  If I recall correctly, the only posted
objections to the use of the Gregorian Calendar have come from myself,
and they were all pointless nitpicks.

It is essential that the Y2K DATExxxx proposal specify a calendar
system.  I fully support the proposal from Arnold Rots and propose the
following language as one more point to add for the American FITS
action:

	The default interpretation of all DATExxxx keywords shall be
	done using the Gregorian Calendar.

If there are no objections to this we should move for adoption.

--
Steve Allen          UCO/Lick Observatory       Santa Cruz, CA 95064
sla at ucolick.org      Voice: +1 408 459 3046     http://www.ucolick.org/~sla
"You should know better than to trust a strange computer." -- C-3PO to R2-D2