This is a quite interesting thread, Pat.  Thanks for sharing it with us here.  Please 
allow me to participate in this discussion taking advantage of or in the wake of our 
previous... "quarrels" concerning 'centi vs. milli'.

On Wed, 24 Jul 2002 10:39:45  
 Pat Naughtin wrote:
>Dear Jeff,
>
>Please don't misunderstand me. I'm not suggesting that any official SI units
>(e.g. millilitres and millimetres) are technically inferior or superior to
>any other units (e.g. centilitres and centimetres). What I am saying - as
>strongly as I can - is that for any nation that is currently in the process
>of metrication, the choice of millimetres and millilitres will hasten the
>process remarkably.
>
This whole issue got me thinking, Pat.  Why is it that this has been so?  Have we 
stopped to think whether the answer is in the use of the prefix itself that was chosen 
or whether it may have more to do with how other industries and stakeholders are 
cooperating or setup to tackle the transition?

I believe that the above questions are important.  I feel we need to understand the 
reason(s) behind successes and failures.  One aspect that you may be overlooking in 
your example of the clothing industry is the fact that people in these trades are (for 
some stupid reason(s) that baffle(s) me!...) significantly more averse to change and 
are very entrenched with the inch crap!  Please notice the association with personal 
measurements, like height and weight.

These trades are professions that are significantly influenced by how people relate to 
measurements, much more so than construction.  Take a look at Canada, for instance.  
It may be true that all civil engineering has gone "metric" when it comes to highway 
construction, concrete, etc.  But, clothing hasn't.

How would one expect the cm (or mm for that matter) to "stick" if folks are still 
talking about their heights in ft and in???  Your proposal appears to be that if this 
industry (clothing) has gone metric via the mm that they would have changed just as 
quickly and efficiently as other trades.  My contention though is, you wish, my 
friend!  As long as people are still stuck with the stupid ft-in combination crap, 
forget it!  Not even the mm would save the day!  Or would you recommend that we start 
producing our body heights in mm?  (I sincerely hope not since we simply do not have 
that info with mm accuracy - our heights vary too much during the day, so cm accuracy 
would be just "right"!)

In other words, I think it behooves us to investigate and analyze these situations 
with more depth lest we err, be inaccurate or too hasty in our assessments.
...
>> Metrication in the Australian building industry was completed within about a
>> year - the textile, clothing, and footwear industries are still struggling
>> with metrication after 30 years so far (and counting).
>>
Again, let's ask the question why this is being so.  Coincidently (or not...) these 
industries have strong intrinsic ties to *personal* body data, and on this it seems to 
me Australian people in general are still struggling!
...
>>> I realise that I could hit them with the trading standards hammer, but I
>> was
>>> looking for a more subtle response. I really don't want Puccino's just to
>>> change the metric amount on the cup to 227 ml, 237 ml or whatever. I'd
>>> rather see the rational quantity that is the cup size (25 cl or 250 ml)
>> and
>>> no imperial equivalent.
>>>
One interesting corollary and advantage of allowing them to use cl in this case would 
be that the number would indeed look "cleaner".  I'm sorry, Pat, but I'd rather see 23 
cl in labels than 227, 237, 231, etc!  The former may at least give us the impression 
that they are using rational numbers.  I'd rather have the public used to using 
rational metric sizes than some silly 227's.  (So, one other point I ended up 
"discovering" after all...  :-)   )

(Note: And I, BTW, favor the ml, just like you, Pat!  Why?  Just because I'm more 
familiar and used to using it, and *not* necessarily because it's an "engineering" 
power of 10.  However, I'd have *NO OBJECTIONS WHATSOEVER* if the industry started 
using or chose to use the cl!  ;-)    )
 
Marcus


Is your boss reading your email? ....Probably
Keep your messages private by using Lycos Mail.
Sign up today at http://mail.lycos.com

Reply via email to