Hello all, I can appreciate the concerns posted about a AAT ICAS metric-time initiative, however please keep in mind that the AAT is using a process to help ensure that technical and use issues are appropriately addressed.
> One major flaw in your scheme for calendar reform is that your proposal does > not fit coherently within the framework of the International System of Units > (SI). There already is a valid and coherent unit of time within SI. That > unit is the second (s). No other time unit can exist and be a part of SI. > Those are the rules. ICAS is not designed as a proposal for time reform, but rather as a chronological alternative which may be used concurrent with or independent of other calendar and clock systems. The objective of ICAS is not to speak for SI, but to explore the development of measures via principles upon which SI is based. And ICAS features have been designed to support these conditions of use. The AAT knows that there is some interest in metric time by at least some number of folks. Where practical, the AAT has used ICAS as a time system for AAT programs, which include ICAS development. The AAT is working to analyze and prepare additional studies of ICAS not yet reported on the aatideas web. Until later, Ron -- Ronald L. Stone, programs manager Alliance for the Advancement of Technology (AAT) [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.aatideas.org AAT PO Box 141155 Mpls., MN 55414-1155 USA
