-----Original Message----- From: Pat Naughtin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: U.S. Metric Association <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: January 30, 2002 20:35 Subject: [USMA:17779] Re: Un-define non-SI (was RE: Voting for SI)
>Dear Jim and All, > >This is a quote from the Australian 'National Measurement Act 1960' Section >12. I thought it might be relevant to your discussion. > >Essentially it seems to say that you use the approved units of measurement >or your contract is void. > >The nub, of course, is in the regulations where the bitter fights take place >to have individuals and groups favourite units included. In this way the >wool merchants have fought for and won the inclusion of micron as one of the >'Additional derived units of measurement' . Would "micron" not qualify as a nik-name for a micrometre much as "litre" is a nik-name for cubic decimetre and "hectare" is a nik-name for square hectometre? (the "angstrom" would not qualify). Duncan > >Cheers, > >Pat Naughtin >CAMS - Certified Advanced Metrication Specialist > - United States Metric Association >ASM - Accredited Speaking Member > - National Speakers Association of Australia >Member, International Federation for Professional Speakers
