-----Original Message-----
From: Pat Naughtin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: U.S. Metric Association <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: April 27, 2002 22:41
Subject: [USMA:19723] Re: Answer from MT editors

>Dear Han and All,
>
>This same process happened in Australia as well. As the computer revolution
>hit our shores it bought with it such incredibly inefficient things as:
>
>11 inch by 210 mm paper
>computer points as opposed to printers points
>date formats from the USA
>screen sizes in nominal inches
>
>Fortunately, the paper issue has gone away (to be universally replaced by
>A4), but unfortunately the other issues are still with us.
>
>I think fairly often of the riddle:
>
>Q   How many computer engineers does it take to change a light bulb?
>
>A   None, they simply define darkness as the new standard.
>
>I know that this is unkind to computer engineers � both software and
>hardware � because they simply are working in an environment where they
>often have no knowledge of standards so they have to make some up.
>
>Unfortunately, they also seem to be completely unaware that others (such as
>scientists and mechanical, civil, and chemical engineers) have spent
>hundreds of years devising and refining standards that make all of our
lives
>simpler and easier.
>
>I think that the basis of our frustration with computer engineers rests on
>their apparent ignorance of even the most basic knowledge of standards. Two
>of my favorites are the redefinition of the printer's point as the computer
>point and the decision of Microsoft to divide centimetres into quarters.

Please add my favorite:  their ignorance (or ignoring) of rational standards
relating to the documentation of the date.
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
>on 2002/04/26 18.19, Han Maenen at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>

Reply via email to