Dear Martin, On 2007 01 28 7:59 PM, "Martin Vlietstra" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi all, > > Having been brought up in South Africa and lived there during the change-over > to the metric system, I was not aware of any difficulties by the use of the > centimetre in the textile industry. I received my information from several people who, after working in the South African wool industry, came to Australia and worked in the wool industry here. Like Australian wool industry workers they used a muddle of millimetres, centimetres, fractional centimetres, inches, fractional inches, feet, fractional feet, yards, and fractional yards for their length measures. > > The biggest difference between South Africa and the UK (where I now live) is > that South Africa banned the sale of measuring devices that were calibrated in > imperial units. I believe that Australia did the same - Pat should be able to > confirm. Yes, you are correct that dual measuring tapes were banned but they were then allowed a little time later following protests from (mostly) politicians and journalists. Here are some extracts from Kevin Wilk's report, 'Metrication in Australia (1992) that seems relevant to this issue: ** The Board consistently opposed the use of dual measurement statements and dual tape measures and other measuring instruments. Ample evidence existed to show that dual units inhibited attempts by the public to try their hand at metric measurements and significantly delayed the process of learning metric by continually postponing the opportunity to learn by experience. Yet clear evidence also existed that, faced with a situation of inevitability, metric units in everyday use were far from difficult and people learned quickly from an extraordinarily small number of experience repetitions. Arising out of this policy towards dual measurement, the Board sought and obtained an amendment to the Customs (Prohibited Imports) Regulations to prohibit the importation of non-essential, non-precision measuring instruments for ordinary use, except where it could be demonstrated that they were essential for the continued operation and maintenance of existing imperial plant which it would be unduly costly or impracticable to convert. At the same time, an agreement between local manufacturers of measuring instruments was obtained, if somewhat reluctantly, to manufacture dual or imperial instruments for the Australian market, only under conditions which would have applied if those instruments were to have been imported. The purpose of these regulations and agreements was to limit the growth in the number of non-essential measuring devices which would become obsolete or obsolescent as Australia progressed towards total metrication. It was felt that many of the dual tape measures being purchased by the public were not essential as all building and handyman materials were sold in metric and the public had been sufficiently exposed to metric processes to be only minutely inconvenienced by being obliged to work in metric. >From the continuing complaints about the unavailability of dual tape measures and the resurgence of buying that followed announcement of the withdrawal of the regulation, it had to be assumed that, while the logic of the process was probably correct, the psychology of it apparently was not. In continuing to obtain imperial instruments, people were not necessarily talking about a logical situation but about the fears, rational or otherwise, they had of being caught in a situation in which they would be unable to understand the measurements being used. In the case of measuring tapes they seemed to wish to obtain dual, not so much because they needed them to measure with, nor because they wished to practice converting back and forth from metric to imperial to educate themselves, but as a safeguard against being caught in a situation in which they could not understand the measurements being used. Until people had experienced metrics in as many different situations as it required, and they adjudged themselves competent to understand metric in all such situations, they would not declare that they had "got used to metrics". Although metrication was primarily a technical exercise it was also a social and cultural change. There was a large number of people from all walks of life whose daily work activities did not give them experience in metric measurement but whose hobbies and interests were measurement related. Although this group included many well-educated people, it also included people of lesser educational attainments who might have found difficulty in seeing the advantages of rapid self re-education, and, therefore, shown little inclination to depart from dual measurements. While for some people learning to cope with metrics may have been triggered, in same cases, by the example of knowledge acquired by the other partner, the continuing high demand for dual advertising in real estate and for dual measuring tapes for the home handyman seemed to indicate that, generally, it did not. Likewise, the presumed educational impact on parents of helping children with their homework did not occur. On the contrary, there was considerable evidence of children, educated only in metric, learning about feet and inches and miles per gallon etc. from their parents. ** As a side issue, I counted the tapes and rulers available in a large hardware shop currently available in 2007, after 37 years of trying to do metric conversion using dual sided rulers and tapes. Of the 83 different types available: one was in millimetres only; two were in centimetres only; 7 were dual inches and centimetres; 73 were dual with inches and millimetres; and there were no feet and inch only tapes or rulers. The one that was in millimetres only is the only kind that I use life's too short for more than one length measuring unit don't duel with dual! I hope this helps. Cheers, Pat Naughtin PO Box 305, Belmont, 3216 Geelong, Australia Phone 61 3 5241 2008 Pat Naughtin is the editor of the free online monthly newsletter, 'Metrication matters'. You can subscribe at http://www.metricationmatters.com/newsletter Pat is also recognised as a Lifetime Certified Advanced Metrication Specialist (LCAMS) with the United States Metric Association. He is also editor of the 'Numbers and measurement' section of the Australian Government Publishing Service 'Style manual for writers, editors and printers'. He is a Member of the National Speakers Association of Australia and the International Federation for Professional Speakers. See: http://www.metricationmatters.com This email and its attachments are for the sole use of the addressee and may contain information that is confidential and/or legally privileged. This email and its attachments are subject to copyright and should not be partly or wholly reproduced without the consent of the copyright owner. Any unauthorised use of disclosure of this email or its attachments is prohibited. If you receive this email in error, please immediately delete it from your system and notify the sender by return email. > Regards > > Martin >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> >> From: Pat Naughtin <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> >> To: U.S. Metric Association <mailto:[email protected]> >> >> Sent: Sunday, January 28, 2007 12:59 AM >> >> Subject: [USMA:37900] Re: Are there Decimeters ? If sow then Where? >> >> >> Dear Bill, >> >> I have interspersed some remarks in blue. >> >> On 2007 01 27 1:56 PM, "Bill Hooper" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> >>> I am becoming more an more convinced that Pat is right in trying to get rid >>> of the prefix "centi-". >> >> My position is clear. I firmly believe that if you want to have a fast, >> smooth, economical, and successful metric transition, you will choose not to >> use centimetres and I also believe that there is enough observational >> evidence to support this view. (see: centimetres or millimetres which will >> you choose? at: http//www.metricationmatters.com/articles ) >> >> I am also aware that the use of centimetres is firmly embedded in some >> industries (eg. textiles), in some scientific laboratories, and almost all >> schools. My view is that the folk that work in these areas should settle >> back, relax and enjoy the slow, bitter, expensive metric transitions that, in >> my opinion, they are sure to experience. I am not about to waste time trying >> to get rid of the prefix "centi-" as this is probably too difficult (maybe >> impossible) once an individual, a company, a laboratory, or an industry has >> chosen to go down the centimetre pathway. >> >> >>> But there are indeed reasons why it may not be easy. He, himself, quotes >>> some from South African sources (below). >>> On 2007 Jan 26 , at 12:06 AM, Pat Naughtin wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> Here is an extract from the July/August 1978 edition of the South African >>>> Metrication News. >>>> >>>>> (snip) >>>>> 4. It should be noted that the objection to centimetre is confined to >>>>> its use as a linear measure. When raised to the second and third powers, >>>>> as in areas and volumes respectively, it is necessary to employ square >>>>> centimetres and cubic centimetres to render the steps between successive >>>>> multiples of area and volume, practical ones. >> >> You are right that there can be a rather large gap if you don't have square >> centimetres and cubic centimetres available. We have, however, sort of >> solved the second of these by using the litre and the millilitre. With the >> first of these, the square centimetre, there seems to me to be a tendency to >> avoid this unit altogether in most industries, even if that means larger >> numerical values or decimal fractions of a metre. The only application that >> I have seen for square centimetres is for children in junior classes doing >> early area calculations. I'm sure that there are other applications but I >> haven't seen them on an industrial scale. >> >> >>> This (above) is another situation where it is going to be difficult to get >>> rid of centi-, even if we want to. >>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> 5. In South Africa the centimetre is used in the clothing and textile >>>>> industries and therefore also for related dimensions of the human body. >>>>> It should, preferably, not be introduced elsewhere. >>> >>> And here (above) even South Africa compromises on trying to get rid of the >>> centimetre. >>> >>> Bill Hooper >>> 1810 mm tall >>> Fernandina Beach, Florida, USA >>> >> You will also recall that the choice of centimetre in the South African >> textile industries meant that the metric transition is still slow, >> difficult, and expensive after more that 35 years so far. >> >> Cheers, >> >> Pat Naughtin >> PO Box 305 Belmont 3216 >> Geelong, Australia >> 61 3 5241 2008 >> >> >> Pat Naughtin is manager of http://www.metricationmatters.com an internet >> website that primarily focuses on the many issues, methods and processes >> that individuals, groups, companies, and nations use when upgrading to the >> metric system. You can contact Pat Naughtin at >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> >
