I was going to quote Fowler, too, but thought better of it. <g> He was very progressive for his time, also preferring "program" to "programme" -- also for sound etymological reasons. In addition to what you have quoted, Fowler complained that the British use "ise," in all cases, because it's easier than learning to spell. I also have the book he wrote in collaboration with his brother -- "The King's English." Bill Potts, CMS San Jose, CA http://metric1.org [SI Navigator] > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On > Behalf Of Joseph B. Reid > Sent: January 14, 2001 15:28 > To: U.S. Metric Association > Subject: [USMA:10475] RE: Fw: [ISO8601] XML does not mention ISO 8601. > > > Bill Potts wrote in USMA 10472: > > >Han Maenen wrote: > >> the correct title > >> is the 'International Organisation for Standardisation'. > > > >I suggest you return to their web site and check again. > > > >It's International Organization for Standardization. > >(American/International, not British spelling.) > > > Since hairs are being split, allow me to further split these hairs. > > The Shorter Oxford English Dictionary gives only -ize for these words. > > Fowler in his Modern English Usage says "Most English printers follow the > French practice of changing *-ize* to *-ise*; but the *OED* of the Oxford > University Press, the *Encylopaedia Britannica* of the Cambridge > Universsity Press, *The Times*, & American usage, in all of which > *-ize* is > the accepted form, carry authority enough to outweigh superior numbers. > >
