On Wed, 6 Feb 2002 14:04:27 Joseph B. Reid wrote: >Han Maenen's USMA 17974 surprises me. It reminds me of Napoleon's >"customary metric system" of 1812 which divided the metre in binary >fractions. >>...
Perhaps Han is not realizing the following. SI is decimal, we should not need to resort to some binary fraction of a perfectly legitimate prefixed SI unit to provide info on size of fonts. However, in case we did need that, I offered the Q as = 10^-4 as an alternative "unit" (irk...) for typographers to use in lieu of the 0.25 mm "size". I'd tolerate this more than the creation of another prefix... :-S The use of any fractions, no matter how... "rational" or "convenient" they might be, would technically amount to its being a "conversion factor", a no-no in SI framework. >I agree with Ma Be's message in USMA 17953: >... Thanks for your support, Joe, and also for providing me with the reference to the use of 'u' as a "substitute" for the micro symbol. Marcus Is your boss reading your email? ....Probably Keep your messages private by using Lycos Mail. Sign up today at http://mail.lycos.com
