Jim Frysinger wrote in USMA 17716: >Adrian, I proposed this many months ago. Suppose NIST were to certify >only metric scales on instruments and were to promulgate an announcement >that henceforth all non-SI quantities were uncertified and could be >anything the user felt like. Then the confidence in non-SI quantities >would vanish and their value in industry would, too. > >Ironically, this is actually a step towards "less government" and that >is why I had proposed the above in response to something that was posted >by Jim Elwell. NIST would not be telling people that they could not use >inches and pounds. In fact they would be removing the restriction that >the yard must be 0.9144 m, and so forth. I could advertize and sell a >yard of ribbon and caveat emptor! That yard of ribbon might be only 6.8 >cm long. However, I would continue to be required to label the package >of ribbon with an actual (or minimum) length in SI units and that is >what I would be held to. Which units do you think that consumers would >start paying attention to? MooJuce Dairy sells milk in containers >labeled "1 gal, 2 L" for $1.48 and CowMilch Dairy sells milk in >containers labeled "2 gal, 1.5 L" for $1.52. Which is the better deal? >(Remember, "gal" has no legal meaning but "L" does!)
This is being done now in Britain. The Sunderland greengrocer is being prosecuted for selling using non-certified pound and ounce "weights". Joseph B.Reid 17 Glebe Road West Toronto M5P 1C8 TEL. 416-486-6071
