>Of Gene Mechtly >Are you sufficiently interested to ask legal authorities in the Department >of Commerce? (I note that Karen Brown is only the "Acting Director" of >NIST as stated in the 2002 Edition of HB 44.)
Possibly, but I cannot give her much of a reason for wanting to know. Why should she be interested in hearing from me? As with the SI brochure, I think that some of these documents could be written better. There are several possible simple styles: 1. Similar to UK style - State all non-metric units in terms of metric units: 1 inch = 0.0254 m 1 foot = 0.3048 m 1 yard = 0.9144 m 1 mile = 1609.344 m 2. Similar to Irish/Canadian style - State any one non-metric unit in terms of a metric unit, then define the tiers of other non-metric units: 1 inch = 0.0254 m 1 foot = 12 inch 1 yard = 3 feet 1 mile = 1760 yard 3. State any one non-metric unit (A) in terms of a metric unit, then define the other non-metric units in terms of (A): 1 inch = 0.0254 m 1 foot = 12 inch 1 yard = 36 inch 1 mile = 63360 inch I would keep the legal document simple by eliminating inverted definitions (e.g. 1 metre = 39.37etc inch) and eliminating the multiple ways of defining the same thing (inches in a mile, feet in a mile, chains in a mile) etc. Similarly, I think that documents like the FPLA should not (a) provide yet source of conversion factors, as in "1 inch = 2.54 cm" and (b) should not try to embed conversions of working values within the body of text as in "Not less than 1/4 inch (6.35 mm) in height" They should simply state the value in one system and be done with it (all Federal legal instruments should be in metric units anyway).
