They are virtually, SI. Anti-metricists would say blatantly SI! D. -----Original Message----- From: Ezra Steinberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: U.S. Metric Association <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: March 22, 2002 19:57 Subject: [USMA:18994] Canadian Geographical Society
>Duncan: > >Which units does th e CGS use in their publications? What seems to be >their editorial policy? > >Cheers, >Ezra > > >Duncan Bath wrote: > >> We have a competitor in Canada viz. Canadian Geographical Society. >> I subscribe. >> Duncan >> -----Original Message----- >> From: M R <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> To: U.S. Metric Association <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Date: March 22, 2002 16:07 >> Subject: [USMA:18987] Fwd: Re: National geographic again >> >> >As long as National Geographic has no competition, >> >they will continue to use ifp, so we have to find >> >a competitor magazine and buy it. >> > >> >Madan >> > >> > >> >--- kilopascal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> From: "kilopascal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> >> To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> >> Subject: [USMA:18966] Re: National geographic again >> >> Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2002 18:16:48 -0500 >> >> Reply-to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> >> >> 2002-03-21 >> >> >> >> If National Geographic feels that it has to use FFU >> >> in English because of >> >> its American audience, that is a decision we have to >> >> live with for now. >> >> But, that does not justify using FFU for English >> >> speakers world-wide. The >> >> logical thing to do would be to publish a metric >> >> edition for the rest of the >> >> English speaking world. >> >> >> >> But, let's face facts. Such an endeavour would not >> >> be cost effective. We >> >> as metric proponents have argued for years that >> >> American companies are at a >> >> disadvantage because they will either have to go >> >> completely metric or >> >> manufacture two different product lines for the >> >> American market based on FFU >> >> and the world market based on metric. But, American >> >> industry doesn't seem >> >> to have been scared by our argument. They seem to >> >> feel that they can >> >> produce a single product entirely in FFU and still >> >> sell it to the world. >> >> And so far, they can! >> >> >> >> Unless there is a significant number of complaints >> >> from people (and/or >> >> governments) around the world that demand metric or >> >> else, and the American >> >> market is no longer able to sustain American >> >> industry, don't expect these >> >> people to bend just because we think they should. >> >> The US will change only >> >> when it hurts them where it counts....in the wallet. >> >> >> >> John >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> >> From: "Ezra Steinberg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> >> To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> >> Sent: Thursday, 2002-03-21 17:24 >> >> Subject: [USMA:18962] Re: National geographic again >> >> >> >> >> >> > I'm still puzzled how National Geographic can >> >> convert to metric in >> >> languages >> >> > other than English but still support the use of >> >> only US customary units in >> >> > the English-language edition (because the US set >> >> of units is not entirely >> >> > identical to the Imperial set of units). Do they >> >> perhaps figure that since >> >> > they claim nearly all English-language readers are >> >> American (can this >> >> really >> >> > be true?) and that the US system is close enough >> >> to the Imperial one so as >> >> > not to matter? (After all, saying "millions of >> >> gallons" is essentially >> >> > identical whether you're referring to the US or >> >> the Imperial set of >> >> units). >> >> > >> >> > Ezra >> >> > >> >> >> > >> > >> >__________________________________________________ >> >Do You Yahoo!? >> >Yahoo! Movies - coverage of the 74th Academy Awards� >> >http://movies.yahoo.com/ >> > >
