On Sat, 06 May 2023 16:10:31 -0800 skyhorse--- via ntg-context <ntg-context@ntg.nl> wrote:

> > > Hans Hagen via ntg-context <ntg-context@ntg.nl> wrote: > >...... > > Oh, so a bug, I'll fix the message. Not really a unit but then, feet > > is also not one. > > > > That is incorrect. Feet is an establish and proper unit of > measurement, which consists of 12 inches. It is used by, at least, > several hundred million people. It can be said that the ability to > grok and manipulate fractions has many benefits, which the metric > system sorely lacks. The inch is properly defined as *exactly* 2.54cm. So the foot is a proper unit defined as 12*2.54cm. Manipulating fractions, I stated, is the entire point of Imperial measurements. Now go figure: Physical Review Letters once objected to my publishing a graph without units on the abscissa. I satisfied the editor by adding $[m\times m^{-1}]$ (my graph was in radians). Alan ___________________________________________________________________________________ If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki! maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / https://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context webpage : https://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://context.aanhet.net archive : https://bitbucket.org/phg/context-mirror/commits/ wiki : https://contextgarden.net ___________________________________________________________________________________