But SI should become customary.
Robert Bushnell
On Aug 21, 2013, at 4:06 PM, Natalia Permiakova wrote:
> i think "US Customary" is better than "Imperial"
>
> so, I like any of the options:
>
> US Customary and Metric
> or
> US Customary and Standard (too good to be true to see it today on usps.com,
> in reverse order - event better)
> or
> US Customary and The Rest of The World ( ;-) )
>
>
>
>
>
> From: John M. Steele <jmsteele9...@sbcglobal.net>
> To: U.S. Metric Association <usma@colostate.edu>
> Sent: Wednesday, August 21, 2013 1:41 PM
> Subject: [USMA:53186] Re: Metric / Imperial / "Standard"
>
> Since the US system is unique, it needs a unique name. NIST uses the term,
> U.S. Customary, so we ought to use it.
>
> Seems to me that inch-pound is a rather generic term for any system that uses
> inches and pounds. It could be applied as a "catch-all" to describe
> commonality of US Customary, Imperial, and any related versions.
>
> The US version is NOT Imperial as evidenced by the different gallon, bushel,
> ton, and the lack of a stone. Imperial is a measurement system of the United
> Kingdom, adapted from earlier systems in 1824. It was probably used by most
> British Commonwealth countries before they went metric. NONE of the new 1824
> definitions were adopted by the United States; it continued using various
> pre-Imperial units.
>
> From: "c...@traditio.com" <c...@traditio.com>
> To: U.S. Metric Association <usma@colostate.edu>
> Sent: Wednesday, August 21, 2013 12:57 PM
> Subject: [USMA:53181] Re: Metric / Imperial / "Standard"
>
> Concerning Metric Pioneer's recent correspondence, I've always had a problem
> with what to call the U.S. measurements.
>
> Officially, the term "inch-pound" has been used. I don't care for that
> because it does not indicate clearly a measurement system. Moreover, it
> singles out only two measurements, whereas there are many in the "system."
>
> Another common term used is "U.S. Customary" (USC). Is this a good choice?
>
> Now "Imperial" is being recommended by some. Is this a good alternative? I
> suspect that most people would not connect "imperial" with the United States,
> perhaps Canada.
>
> I agree that "standard" is not a good choice at all. The standard should be
> SI metric.
>
> Paul Trusten and you other USMA officers out there, what is the current
> recommendation?
>
> Martin Morrison
> USMA "Metric Today" Columnist
>
>
>
>
>
