There is a reason we don't currently use dual labeling on highway signs. It would be confusing. Sign design for highways is not only an art but a science as well. Signs need to be simple and concise with no ambiguity. Dual labeling does not meet those criteria.
The logistics of highway sign conversion in the US are involved. I have been thinking quite a while about what is really needed to do such a conversion and will write another post in a little while for all of you to comment on. Phil -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Gavin Young - Renewable Electricity Solutions Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2005 9:05 PM To: U.S. Metric Association Subject: [USMA:32670] Re: USMA announcement No need for two types of signage, simply have the signs dual labeled. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Stephen Gallagher" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, 11 March, 2005 08:36 Subject: [USMA:32455] Re: USMA announcement > > --- Stephen Humphreys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I see that sort of thinking in the same way as > > telling someone who rides a > > horse that he's self-centred because he won't drive > > a car! > > Or people who have traditionally ridden horses and > won't let people drive cars. > > For example, some times the society in question can > tolerate both horsepaths and highways. But in some > cases, a they can't. Most countries wouldn't install > both metric and non-metric highways signage for > practical reasons amongst other things. So in some > cases a standard for everyone has to be established. > Do you go with the existing standard which may or may > not be better or worse, or a different standard? > -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.9.6 - Release Date: 2005-04-11
