On 10/22/06, STANLEY DOORE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The best argument I've read here is to use a decimal point between the whole digit part of the number its decimal part instead of a comma to avoid confusion with a separator among numbers, clauses, etc. in text. It would be consistent with language.Therefore, I would support and advocate retaining the decimal point to separate the whole part of a number from its fractional part as an international standard to avoid continuing confusion. A comma then could be used to divide a large number into groups of three digits in lieu of a space to show a connection rather than separate three digit standalone numbers. This would be consistent with writing language. A space still could be used in numbers presented in tables and other appropriate places without confusion.Stan Doore----- Original Message -----From: Remek KoczSent: Sunday, October 22, 2006 10:13 AMSubject: [USMA:37418] Re: Losing the battle by inches | Chicago TribuneThe comma being used as a decimal marker in metric product sizes is part of the "bilingual copout" that's been showing up on many products. It is assumed that metric is only for foreigners, so wherever measurements are given on the packaging, the English text contains only USC measures, while the foreign-language text has only metric. This perpetuates the myth that metric is irrelevant to English speakers. Since comma is used as a decimal separator in many non-English speaking countries, using it with metric dimensions effectively tells the American customer that this is something foreign, and that this number doesn't concern him.
The only other thing that really bothers me is when metric labels use commas instead of periods. .5L I'm okay with but ,5L just bugs me for some reason. Makes me feel like there was some phrase before the measurement and I lost half a sentence somewhere :). The period on the other hand to me is a natural stop point so if I see 3.785L it just makes more sense.
