Dear Paul, The Australian approach to this would be to replace the 551 mL with 600 mL an increase of about 9 %.
As a food iten this would then parallel increases made to other container sizes here. For example: 454 grams rounded to 500 grams is about 10 % (1 pound) 568 millilitres grams rounded to 600 millilitres is about 6 % (1 pint) 227 millilitres grams rounded to 250 millilitres is about 10 % (1 cup) 55 grams rounded to 60 grams is about 9 % (1 egg) In this way, recipes were kept in the same proportions (more or less) with only a slight increase in the overall size of the completed recipe. Cooks could buy (say) a 250 gram block of butter and use the whole amnount in a cake recipe and this would still match well enough with the increases in the other ingredients. I don't know how this might work in the USA as, for example, your quart (946 mL) is much closer to a litre that the imperial quart (1136 mL) that was used in Australia. By the way, I note that you use the abbreviation ml for millilitre. Is this the practice generally in the USA, or is it restricted to the pharmaceutical industry? In Australia mL is recommended and it is the most used, ml is seen, but it is much less common than mL. Cheers, Pat Naughtin LCAMS Geelong, Australia -- on 2003-08-12 03.38, Paul Trusten at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Beyond science, it is, to me, simply the application of commmon sense to US > measurement---use math, not witchcraft! > > My blueberries are packaged in "US Dry Pints", which are translated to be 551 > ml. Why not just call it 500 ml of strawberries? I can understand that > infinitely more than I can understand a dry pint, which, IMHO would NEVER be > understood beyond the ken of a few American blueberry growers! >> >> From: "Michael-O" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Date: 2003/08/11 Mon PM 12:55:56 EDT >> To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Subject: [USMA:26555] What is for you metrication? >> >> Hi, >> >> I am wondering what you people think of the best metrication process. >> >> How elaborated should it be? >> Is metrication the pure measuring or a way of life? >> >> This idea came to me as Bill (?) said, that metric (int'l) roadsigns aren't >> a part of SI/metrication. >> >> Here is my point of view: >> >> It is not the pure scientific thing it is the ease of use, the freedom to >> measure. >> But for me metrication goes further. I believe that 2 scientists which do >> not speak each others language could communicate thru the universal and >> standarized language SI. >> >> It is the simplicity and selfexplanation of int'l road sign, which do not >> say "Yield" or "U-turn" pictograms are much better, which fit in our design >> goal -> standard acronyms for units. >> >> guess this is it in brief >> >> >> *How about you?* >> >> >
