kilopascal wrote:
>
> 2002-10-05
>
> When I set A4 in my StarOffice 6.0, I am
> > formatting paper that is 210 mm by 297 mm. When I set US Letter in my
> > StarOffice 6.0, I am formatting paper that is 215.9 mm by 279.4 mm.
>
> I don't understand why StarOffice designates the the metric A sizes to the
> nearest millimetre and the US sizes to the nearest 100 �m. Why not the same
> number of digits for all paper sizes? And as you stated with tolerances,
> there is no reason that StarOffice can't give the US sizes in whole
> millimeteres such as 216 x 280 mm.
The dialog box actually states, for A4 paper, 210.0 mm by 297.0 mm. I
dropped the last digit. ISO paper is calculated precisely and then
rounded to the nearest millimeter for its specifications, I believe. And
as I go on to say, the tenths of a millimeter are not actually
signficant, since the sizes of paper in use are precise only to the
nearest millimeter, at best.
> In fact, I don't see why they need to state its size anyway. There is no
> reason to call the metric sizes by any name other than their A designation.
> AutoCad uses the A designations only when referring to this paper series.
They do it as a convenience to the user, John. This is a dialog box in
which margins are set, header and footer depths and offsets are set, and
so forth. I certainly have no objection to their explicit statement and
I cannot imagine why anyone would.
Yes, the scroll box lists A3 through A5, B4 (ISO) through B6 (ISO), B4
(JIS) through B6 (JIS), Letter, Legal, Tabloid, C4 through C6, C65, DL,
Env. #6-3/4, Env. Monarch, Env. #9, Env. #10, Env. #11, Env. #12, 16
kai, 32 kai, and 32 kai large. Now, I for one cannot remember the sizes
of all of those styles in millimeters. So I'm actually delighted that
they provide this information. That way, when I click on a style
designation, I see its size in millimeters.
Caveat one: the above information is given in millimeters because
that's the way I have my preferences set. I could also have set them in
centimeters, and have at times in the past. Caveat two: I've enjoyed the
use of the free version of StarOffice (v. 5.2) for so long that I
finally sold off some livestock and blew $65 on StarOffice 6.0. It's
like Micro$oft Office except that it also has a drawing module (in
addition to the drawing tools on the other modules) and it's a heck of a
lot cheaper. Oh ... it's incredibly hard to crash this program when
running in linux. I haven't tried the Windows and Mac versions of
StarOffice that come on the same CD; they may or may not be as stable.
StarOffice also reads and writes in MSOffice document formats.
> > Paper sizes can easily vary by as much as a millimeter in either
> > direction from one manufacturer to another (likewise a millimeter plus
> > or minus due to humidity changes!), so we can just as easily call US
> > Letter paper 216 mm by 279 mm. Or, even, 215 mm by 280 mm. If we used
> > the latter size specifications, U.S. companies would not have to go out
> > and buy new binders, folders, notebooks, filing cabinets, and bookcases.
> > And 215 mm by 280 mm sure seems to have a nice, rational metric ring to
> > it! In terms of street talk, it can be called "twenty-one and a half by
> > twenty-eight paper", if not U.S. Letter paper. Since this size is the
> > prevalent size up and down North and South America, it's sure to catch
> > on while sounding niftily metric.
>
> I don't think it will take hold. If we are to get the FFU units out of
> trade names, we need to come up with "neutral" names that refer to no
> dimension. I would prefer to see the names like letter, legal and ledger
> used. ...
That's what was trying to say, John. No need to change what people call
it unless they call it by its dimensions. So, call it letter size paper,
call it copier size paper, or (instead of "eight and one-half by eleven
paper") call it "twenty-one and a half by twenty-eight paper". All that
industry needs to do (and this is within the adjustments on their paper
cutting machines, I'm sure) is to specify 215 mm by 280 mm instead of
215.9 mm by 279.4 mm. That's only 1.9 mm narrower and 0.6 mm longer than
used now. Most people won't notice the difference and those are easy
numbers to remember. Gee, those are metric units aren't they!
Jim
--
Metric Methods(SM) "Don't be late to metricate!"
James R. Frysinger, LCAMS http://www.metricmethods.com/
10 Captiva Row e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Charleston, SC 29407 phone: 843.225.6789
