Hear, hear, Jim.  Thanks for the very opportune contribution!

Marcus

On Mon, 29 Dec 2003 11:21:27  
 James Frysinger wrote:
>Forgive me for joining this conversation so late in its progress. I've been on 
>vacation.
>
>To reinforce what some others have said I would like to clearly state that the 
>purpose of the prefixes for binary multiples is to provide, in a 
>consensus-based standard, a set of non-SI prefixes that can and should be 
>used where others have previously misused SI prefixes.
>
>IEEE has a strong policy on the proper use of the SI in its standards (and 
>publications) and we were therefore obligated to meet the need for prefixes 
>for binary multiples, else to weaken our policy and allow the continued 
>misuse of SI prefixes. Being in the position to do so, we have published IEEE 
>Std 1541, which very closely mirrors an IEC standard of that nature.
>
>SInce these prefixes for binary multiples "protect" the SI prefixes, it is in 
>the USMA's best interest, I feel, to help promulgate them and to put them up 
>to those who continue to misuse SI prefixes. Now you can say, "Here is a set 
>of consensus-derived prefixes that you ought to be using instead of misusing 
>the SI prefixes."
>
>Therefore this matter is not "off-topic" here, in my opinion.
>
>Jim
>
>-- 
>James R. Frysinger
>Lifetime Certified Advanced Metrication Specialist
>Senior Member, IEEE
>
>http://www.cofc.edu/~frysingj
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>Office:
>  Physics Lab Manager, Lecturer
>  Dept. of Physics and Astronomy
>  University/College of Charleston
>  66 George Street
>  Charleston, SC 29424
>  843.953.7644 (phone)
>  843.953.4824 (FAX)
>
>Home:
>  10 Captiva Row
>  Charleston, SC 29407
>  843.225.0805
>
>


____________________________________________________________
Get 25MB of email storage with Lycos Mail Plus!
Sign up today -- http://www.mail.lycos.com/brandPage.shtml?pageId=plus 

Reply via email to