Adrian wrote: > I guess you and Martin missed the reply where the person posting noted > (correctly) that I had truncated the measurement(s) to one digit after > the decimal point.
In that case then, why not use 'your much despised' Imperial system and you wouldn't need to correct the conversions at all to one, two, three or nine hundred and ninety-nine decimal places? After all, you are talking about a system that was designed and built to Imperial standards and still, generally, has boats built to those standards. Why complicate things unnecessarily when you're talking to a generation that was brought up with Imperial units. Roger Going to France tomorrow so I regret I shan't have a chance to benefit from the wisdom of your reply.
