Not wanting to get involved with the rest of this debate I felt I needed to give my 2-cents worth on the particular aspects below though.
On Thu, 25 Dec 2003 21:57:47 Carl Sorenson wrote: ... In computer science (in which >I just got a degree), no one uses "kibi" gibi" or anything like that... I must confess I'm ambivalent about this array of new prefixes, but I think I support this initiative if only not to get this confused with "true" math prefixes. At the end of the day, I feel (and quite strongly so) that we MUST adhere to principles and not allow them to be "bastardized" by popular usage (as much as some of these can be shown to be useful at times). Therefore, I consider these new developments as a positive attempt to address that. > Try looking at the properties of a folder in Windows Explorer and >you will see an example of the traditional terminology. > Now, it's not because a "majority" or a "strong player" does certain things certain ways that we have to be supportive of their position! Otherwise *real* progress would never take place and we would be held hostage by specific powerplayers in the market! So... No, the merit of things MUST be independently and unbiasedly evaluated and due consideration to sound frameworks and all that. This is an important principle to follow IMHO. If certain concepts have merits and all we should have the courage to stand up and support them, if warranted, but if not, we should also come out in its "condemnation". >We have millions of people using a particular terminology, and a handful >that think it should be changed. The terminology of the millions doesn't >become wrong simply because the handful has a "better" idea. > Evidently sound and true. However, there should be comprehensive debate about this and a decision should be adopted by standards authorities and NOT just let the "market" (SIC) dictate what should and should not be used! So-called "(pseudo)market forces" are precisely the ones to blame for this metrological mess we're in especially in North America! >Likewise, I see nothing wrong with using "b" as the symbol for "bar". I >seriously doubt anyone will get it confused with a "barn". Now, my real main beef is with the position above, which (please correct me if I misread you, Carl) IMHO is not wise. There should be adherence to correct usage of symbols, acronyms and whathave you, otherwise if everybody came up with their own "ideas" about how to write metrological symbols we would be in "terrible(dire) straits". Besides, what signal would we be sending to the market out there? That it's ok to "bastardize" correct usage with the likes of kph, KPH, ML (for ml/mL), etc, etc? Heavens forbid! Pragmatically, >"mb" is a convenient symbol for "millibar". (Personally, I tend to use the >symbol hPa, but I don't get religious about it). >... So, in conclusion, this is NOT a matter of "convenience" but a matter of what is right and wrong in the context of sound metrological use, that's all. 'nuff said. I'll go fly my kite now... You, please, carry on. :-) Marcus ____________________________________________________________ Get 25MB of email storage with Lycos Mail Plus! Sign up today -- http://www.mail.lycos.com/brandPage.shtml?pageId=plus
