Normative: specify time zone ID requirements to reduce divergence between engines

[justingrant]

This proposed change resolves #825 by adding normative spec text to clarify how ECMA-402 implementations should decide which IANA time zone IDs should be primary vs. non-primary. This will enable more consistency between ECMAScript implementations and prevent future divergence.

This PR also accommodates to web reality by aligning ECMA-402 with CLDR and ICU. This should make it easier for all ECMAScript engines to comply with the spec while still being able to use ICU.

This PR is stacked on #876, so please ignore the first commit when reviewing this PR.

Note that the problem of out-of-date primary IDs for renamed Zones (like Asia/Calcutta) is out of scope to this PR, because the spec already requires current IDs, and there's already a plan to fix it that requires no spec changes.

Summary of proposed changes

This PR implements "Option C" in https://github.com/tc39/ecma402/issues/825 by deterministically defining ECMAScript's exceptions from the IANA Time Zone Database's defaults, and then pointing implementers at ICU as a convenient implementation of those exceptions.

We'll start with a baseline of IANA's Zone and Link names and specify a few exceptions:

1. Existing special-cases for Etc/UTC, Etc/GMT, and GMT will be retained.
2. Primary and non-primary IDs must share the same ISO-3166-2 country code, so IANA's time zone merges between countries will be reverted. CLDR and ICU already disallow merges across country boundaries. Note that IANA's merges of time zones *inside* of a country (e.g. Asia/Chongquing=>Asia/Shanghai) will be accepted, also matching current ICU/CLDR behavior.

This PR also makes two other smaller text changes that we expect to have zero impact on current engines:

• Changes #876's recommendations into requirements to limit observable dynamic updating of TZDB info. AFAIK, no existing ECMAScript engine updates TZDB (observably or otherwise!) during the lifetime of the surrounding agent, so this is really a future-compatibility change.
• Adds text recommending a two-year waiting period before a newly-renamed ID becomes primary. These are rare (the last was 2022's Europe/Kiev=>Europe/Kyiv) and when the next rename happens, we'll try to convince CLDR to implement this requirement for us. There are no pending renames, so this is also a future-compatibility change.

Per-engine changes required

Implementing the changes in this PR will impact JS engines differently, given the current divergence between engines:

• For V8 (cc @FrankYFTang) and JSC (cc @Constellation), there should be no change because they rely on ICU and CLDR which already behave like 1-3 above. Note that this PR doesn't affect the plan to fix out-of-date canonicalizations like Asia/Calcutta and Europe/Kiev. This plan is unchanged: as part of landing Temporal Stage 4, switch to use ICU's new icu::TimeZone::getIanaID(), which returns the latest IANA IDs instead of out-of-date canonical IDs like Asia/Calcutta.

• For SpiderMonkey (cc @anba), more changes are needed because currently SpiderMonkey conforms to the spec which requires using backward in TZDB to determine canonicalization. SM could use icu::TimeZone::getIanaID() to implement (2) and (3) above, or could implement the same behavior by reading CLDR data or IANA data directly. Also, this PR will reduce SM's differences in Intl.supportedValuesOf('timeZone') vs. V8/JSC.

Testing

Test262 changes will be needed to validate these normative changes, but I'm not sure how we can run those tests except using the Temporal polyfill. @ptomato I'll be looking for your advice (and perhaps help writing tests!) on this point.

Feedback requested

Feedback is welcome on any part of this proposal, but I'm most interested in making sure that the spec text actually accomplishes what the summary above claims that it does.

[sffc]

Thanks for putting this together @justingrant! We can discuss this at the next TG2 meeting. In the mean time, I encourage the listed reviewers to take a look.

[ptomato]

Test262 changes will be needed to validate these normative changes, but I'm not sure how we can run those tests except using the Temporal polyfill.

It's fine to submit tests to test262 that no engine can pass yet, as long as they are correct according to the current snapshot of ECMA-262 or 402 or a Stage 3 proposal.

[FrankYFTang]

4. e.g. PST7PDT=>America/Los_Angeles

I assuem you mean to say "e.g. PST8PDT=>America/Los_Angeles" ? not "PST7PDT=>America/Los_Angeles" right?

[FrankYFTang]

I am not sure what these CLDR tool files for but it mention https://github.com/unicode-org/cldr/blob/a6fbd0ffa1db0c9f60dc0f678ace589366ae7f3a/tools/cldr-code/src/main/resources/org/unicode/cldr/icu/timezone_aliases.txt#L100 https://github.com/unicode-org/cldr/blob/a6fbd0ffa1db0c9f60dc0f678ace589366ae7f3a/tools/cldr-code/src/main/resources/org/unicode/cldr/util/data/TimeZoneAliases.txt#L86

Here is good one https://github.com/unicode-org/cldr/blob/a6fbd0ffa1db0c9f60dc0f678ace589366ae7f3a/common/supplemental/supplementalMetadata.xml#L1800

Look at

<zoneAlias type="EST" , 

etc

[sffc]

TG2 discussion: https://github.com/tc39/ecma402/blob/main/meetings/notes-2024-04-25.md#normative-specify-time-zone-id-requirements-to-reduce-divergence-between-engines-877

[justingrant]

I just pushed a new commit that includes what I think resolves all review feedback. @gibson042 @sffc (and anyone else who's interested) do you want to re-review?

[justingrant]

If you want to update StringSplitToList to support empty-string S (with result in alignment with String.prototype.split, e.g. « "" »), I would not be opposed. But dealing with it at call sites for now seems fine to me.

Nah, I think it's fine as-is, and I actually think it's kinda good bad to force callsites to decide how they want to handle the empty-string case because it's not always intuitive how to handle that case.

Anyway, I adopted both of your last suggestions, rebased, and squashed. I think this PR should be ready to merge.

[justingrant]

I think this PR should be ready to merge.

Actually, I assume we want Test262 tests for this new text. I'll start working on those.

And of course it can't be merged until after it's approved at the next TC39 meeting in a few weeks.

[justingrant]

On second thought, let's save the IsWellFormedUnitIdentifier changes for a followup.

OK, I reverted that part. I think this PR should be ready to present at Helsinki, unless there's other review feedback. Thanks @gibson042 for your help whipping this into shape!

[sffc]

I believe this got TG1 consensus in June 2024.

@justingrant Is this ready to merge, or should we wait for CLDR-17111?

[justingrant]

AFAIK this is ready to merge. It lacks Test262 tests, but I assume these can be added later?

[sffc]

@ben-allen If this is ready to merge, please merge it :)

[FrankYFTang]

@justingrant I got the following bug https://issues.chromium.org/issues/457835186 Any comment about that?