2002-02-09 The inconsistency in the use of SI by people and organisations can be traced back to the way people are trained to use units. We are all taught in the elementary school to be good spellers. But, why can't the schools also emphasise proper use of SI? I think this has to be done due to the lack of proper training in SI that our teachers receive. And what they are taught is what is usually passed on to the students, right or wrong.
Why can't the law or who ever has the jurisdiction, require that as part of receiving a certificate to teach, all teachers must be CAMS certified and the teaching of SI was be per either the ISO standards or the local standards derived from the ISO? This would eliminate a lot of inconsistency in what our students learn. An emphasis on getting it right would eliminate a lot of headaches later on down the road. Teachers already graduated and holding a certificate could in turn obtain CAMS certification at a refresher course and thus be certified to teach SI in the schools. Can anybody offer some ideas on how this idea can be introduced to those organisations that make decisions on what a teacher must know in order to be certified? Does anyone see any reason why CAMS certification as part of receiving a teaching certificate would not be feasible or desirable? I really feel that CAMS certification would really help not only in promoting SI in the schools but in getting it right when it is used. Comments? John ----- Original Message ----- From: "James R. Frysinger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: "U.S. Metric Association" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, 2002-02-09 11:44 Subject: [USMA:18085] Re: Spaces (was Olympic geometries(2)) Jim, You raise an excellent point. Let me elaborate the point with the usual caveat and disclaimer that I am not a lawyer. However, this may prove to be a useful "short guide" to various documents and may help put things in perspective. 1. SI 10 is an American National Standard. It has the status of a voluntary standard (invokable by contract, of course) of industry. There is no federal declaration of SI 10 as a federal regulation or law, so unless invoked by contract it has no legal standing. That does not impugn its value, however, since it is widely recognized throughout industry! And that industry crosses our American national boundaries, via IEEE's international membership. Roughly, the ISO standards are on an equal footing with this document, though in some countries ISO standards are also invoked as national standards. Bottom line: SI 10 is something that a large portion of industry has agreed to abide by. 2. We also have the DoC/NIST Federal Register notice: Metric System of Measurement: Interpretation of the International System of Units for the United States [63 FR 40334-40340, 1998 July 28]. The USMA home page provides a link to a pdf copy of this notice. This is the legally binding federal regulation in the United States. To assist people in using this, the DoC/NIST folks have also provided guidance in the form of Special Publications 330 and 811, among others. Bottom line: this is the law of the land, regarding the metric system, in the United States of America and as such conveys some national differences from the SI brochure, "Le Syst�me International d'Unit�s". 3. The BIPM, on behalf of the CGPM publishes a brochure, "Le Syst�me International d'Unit�s", which is the international authority across all fields of commerce, in all fields of science, and for all signatory governments. It is actually a document of state, arising from an international treaty, "La Convention du M�tre". The brochure is published in two languages, as are many international documents of state, French and English, the primary and secondary languages of diplomacy. The French version takes legal precedence. Bottom line: this is the international, defining document for the SI. Now to the point of discussion. Nowhere in the brochure (paragraph 3, above) is there an explicit statement requiring a space between numbers and units. Yet, that is the way the brochure is written, so one might see this as "tacitly suggestive". However, SI 10 (paragraph 1, above) does require a space in its normative (i.e., "mandatory") text. Likewise NIST SP 811 also explicitly requires a space between number and unit, though SP 330 (essentially an American national "translation" of the SI brochure) does not. The federal notice (paragraph 2, above) also requires a space in "Rules and Conventions", number 12 (page 9 of the pdf file; page 40340 in the Federal Register cited). Bottom line: The space between number and unit is specified in US federal regulations and guidelines; an American National [industry] Standard, SI 10, which is used internationally; and other industry and national standards, such as ISO perhaps; but not by the international organization that defines the SI. Thus, the SI does not require the space, though many implementations of it do. I hope this helps people here understand the legal relationships of SI standards, at least as I perceive them. Subject to correction of the above, this might be worthy of being posted on my web pages. Jim Jim Elwell wrote: > > At 09:20 PM 2/8/2002 -0500, James R. Frysinger wrote: > >The presentation is generally very good, once one remembers that a space > >between numbers and units are not required. > > My copy of SI 10-1997 says the space is required. Why do you say it is not? > > Jim -- Metric Methods(SM) "Don't be late to metricate!" James R. Frysinger, CAMS http://www.metricmethods.com/ 10 Captiva Row e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Charleston, SC 29407 phone/FAX: 843.225.6789
