Those interested in matters of usage may find the following of
interest:
One of the human factors involved in the use of scales of time
concerns the terms or 'name-forms' used to reference particular
scales of time. Alliance for the Advancement of Technology considers
that the term for 'second' should be restricted to the use of the SI
unit for time, and for coordination to a traditional scale of 86 400
seconds in a day.
Those who are involved in efforts to represent time in terms of a
coherent decimal proportion of one day should strongly consider
reserving terms for 'second', 'minute', and 'hour' to the traditional
scales of 60 seconds to the minute, 60 minutes to the hour, and 24
hours to the day. These terms are well-known by these particular
scalar relationships and are widely used as such.
As the meter is not a metric-yard, so should not a decimal sub-unit
of a day such as 0.00001 of a main unit of one day be referenced as a
metric-second. Efforts to reformulate scales of time in terms of
values coherent to a main unit of one day should be represented in
terms of their own independent units.
There exist a number of reasons, some stronger than others, in
support of the use of independent terms for a decimal scale of time.
Moreover, there are no strong reasons to support the representation
of a decimal scale of time in terms of the traditional 24-60-60 scale
terms of 'second', 'minute', and 'hour'.
Those who are involved in efforts to represent decimal scales of time
should ensure that terms properly reserved for use in traditional
scales not be used for emerging decimal scales.
Any decimal clocks referencing terms properly reserved for
traditional scales should be reconsidered to ensure conformance with
established best practices. For additional information about
standards for the representation of decimal scales of time please see
AAT ICAS Itinica at http://www.aatideas.org/itinica/index.html via
Internet.
--
Alliance for the Advancement of Technology (AAT)
--
Ron
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
**********************************************************************
this message does not necessarily reflect
the views of any organization I may be affiliated with,
and should be regarded as personal opinion.
**********************************************************************
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
**********************************************************************
this message does not necessarily reflect
the views of any organization I may be affiliated with,
and should be regarded as personal opinion.
**********************************************************************
