Carl wrote: >The hectare seems to me to be a very useful unit. >It seems more practical for some purposes than square kilometres >and square meters for the same reason that the liter is more >practical than cubic meters and cubic millimeters.
The hectare is listed as a "non-SI unit currently accepted for use". See: http://www.bipm.fr/pdf/si-brochure.pdf I personally see no particular problem with using the metre for all applications (even to replace litres). Metres are well understood by ordinary people (in metric countries). Ordinary people talk about square metres for smaller areas (e.g. domestic/commercial property) and square kilometres for larger areas (e.g. regions). The hectare is only used for farms, presumably due to incomplete transition in that industry. Note the official statement about this type of unit: "Their use is not encouraged." -- Terry Simpson Human Factors Consultant [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.connected-systems.com Phone: +44 7850 511794
