At 11:35 AM 10/11/2009, Magnus Danielson wrote...
The carefull reader will discover my use of the "," for decimal place
and "." for digit separation. The US convention works the other way
around. It is also part of the US adaptation of the SI standard, so
care should be taken not to interprent the NIST publication as
conveying the correct detail for certain things, they are only to be
viewed as local interpretation to the USA, possibly only recommended
use.
No, It's not a "US adaptation," it is part of the SI (ref:
http://www.bipm.org/utils/common/pdf/si_brochure_8.pdf ), which BTW
doesn't allow a glyph to be used for "digit separation," so there can
be no ambiguity:
"5.3.4 Formatting numbers, and the decimal marker
"The symbol used to separate the integral part of a number from its
decimal part is called the decimal marker. Following the 22nd CGPM
(2003, Resolution 10), the decimal marker "shall be either the point on
the line or the comma on the line." The decimal marker chosen should be
that which is customary in the context concerned.
"If the number is between +1 and -1, then the decimal marker is always
preceded by a zero. Following the 9th CGPM (1948, Resolution 7) and the
22nd CGPM (2003, Resolution 10), for numbers with many digits the
digits may be divided into groups of three by a thin space, in order to
facilitate reading. Neither dots nor commas are inserted in the spaces
between groups of three..."
_______________________________________________
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.
