I would find it difficult to raise this question with that magazine.
Hopefully, some one can come forward to point out these shortcomings.
Duncan
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: U.S. Metric Association <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: January 24, 2001 13:45
Subject: [USMA:10643] Re: IEEE disappointing
>On Tue, 23 Jan 2001 20:14:46 -0500, "Duncan Bath"
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>What IEEE was this - Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers?
>>If so, what was the date of the papers?
>>The IEEE I know has, indeed, done an excellent job of, progressively,
moving
>>to the use of SI units. There may be exceptions to their success. Where
>>these come to light, I invariably 'remind' them of their transgressions.
>>Duncan
>
>Duncan:
>
>It's not a 'Proceedings' as such: it's the IEEE Aerospace &
>Electronics Systems Magazine (2000 Nov, Vol 14 #11). There is an
>article by Anil Paryani of Honda R & D Americas, Inc. on their EV Plus
>Battery Packs, where he refers to "provide 60-80 miles real-world
>range" and the battery pack "requires a specialized battery lift due
>to its 1000-pound weight". Other articles use "3.5-w".
>
>The Bluetooth item is a small-format, soft-cover book called "Getting
>What you need from the Bluetooth spec."
>
>Chris
>--
>Metrication information: http://www.metric.org.uk/
>UK legislation, EC Directives, Trading Standards links and more
>Pro-metric mailing list now available.
>
