For practical reference, it's easy to remember that 1 m (meter) is
equivalent to 1000 mm (millimeter). As a result, one can practicably
express height in terms of either meter or millimeter.
Except that millimeters are particularly unsuited to measuring people's
height. They imply far too high a level of precision (people's
effective height would vary according to stance, how many hours they
have been standing upright, or even whether it has rained on their hair).
The most suitable units for this are centimeters.
I realize that many people on this list have a prejudice against
centimeters, and I fully acknowledge that millimeters are the
appropriate unit to use in engineering, architecture, machining, DIY
jobs - in fact the vast majority of industrial and mechanical applications.
But for people's height, millimeters are too precise, and also the
typical height of adults would result in a four digit figure.
You might say, why not use meters to two decimal places ? I would be
quite happy with this, but only because it is a form of "hidden
centimeters". I quote my height as "one seventy three" which can be
equally understood as either 1.73 m or 173 cm. But one of the arguments
in favor of using millimeters in many applications is that it provides
for whole numbers without the need to use decimals (or even worse,
fractions). For this excellent reason engineering dimensions are
normally quoted in integral millimeters rather than meters to decimal
places. Applying the same logic, centimeters should be preferred over
meters for height.
---------------------------------------------------------
Tom Wade | EMail: tee dot wade at eurokom dot ie
EuroKom | Tel: +353 (1) 296-9696
A2, Nutgrove Office Park | Fax: +353 (1) 296-9697
Rathfarnham | Disclaimer: This is not a disclaimer
Dublin 14 | Tip: "Friends don't let friends do Unix !"
Ireland
