At 8 12 04, 04:21 PM, David King wrote: >Maybe instead of using inches there you could have used cm or mm. US standard >paper size I know as Letter size, which I know as 216 by 279 mm, rather than >inch measurements. But I guess you were referring to that, but in inches I >don't know what the size is. Besides, I think the size in inches is approx >anyway? > >Jim Elwell wrote: >>. . . I think the master sheets are about 20x26" (two-up), but it really does >>not matter. If we printed in really large volumes, it would be done four-up >>and the original sheets would be even larger. >> >>Given all this, I have a hard time getting too worked up about "metric" >>paper. As much as I've converted QSI to metric, this is something I've never >>bothered with, and we use 8-1/2x11 paper in our printers. >> >>Our QSI catalog is intentionally designed for a final trim size of 11" high >>by 210 mm wide, so it fits anyone's filing system.
It is a conscious choice on my part that when I mention things originally "designed" in round colloquial units, I use the original units rather than doing a soft conversion. For example, I say "quarter-inch copper pipe" rather than "six point three five millimeter copper pipe" or even just "six millimeter copper pipe." If I were in a metric country, I would know what "standard" size of pipe is out there, and how it is referred to, but I live in this country and don't know either of those things, and it serves no purpose for me to do a soft conversion and pretend that is how it should be referred to. Is 8-1/2x11 approximate? I don't know if there is any standard for it, but it is universally accepted in this country, and I am sure paper is cut to that dimension as accurately as possible, not to 215.9x 279.4 mm. Jim Elwell Jim Elwell, CAMS Electrical Engineer Industrial manufacturing manager Salt Lake City, Utah, USA www.qsicorp.com
