Good tip on the CTRL-Space. I tend to use ordinary spaces and then curse when
they break. I'll try your tip.
I'd like to comment on a few of the points raised in your notes and the notes
below.
The space between a number and a unit symbol is required in NIST SP811.
Although it is not explicitly stated, it is 100% shown by example in the UPLR
and the FTC agency rules providing detail on the FPLA. Actual net content
labeling appears to have a mix of correct and incorrect use (nutrition
labelling seems solidly wrong).
The space is a normal width space. A thin space is referenced (as preferable)
ONLY as a thousands separator.
When used as an adjective, a hyphen is permitted, not required, between number
and a spelled out unit as 35 mm film, or 35-millimeter film. The hyphen is not
permitted if a symbol is used 35 mm film,
In SP811, see sections7.2 and 10.5.3. I believe ANSI SI10 should maintain
consistency with SP811 on these matters.
--- On Thu, 3/12/09, Stan Jakuba <[email protected]> wrote:
> From: Stan Jakuba <[email protected]>
> Subject: [USMA:43719] Fw: [SI] SI10: space between number and unit symbol
> To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]>
> Date: Thursday, March 12, 2009, 4:37 PM
> > Make it a habit to press Ctr and the space bar together
> every time you
> > "type" the space behind the number with a
> unit or when you type a long
> > number such as 12 345.0 or 12 345,0. This, of course,
> serves also as the
> > non-breaking space typing.
> >
> > I have not seen continental Europeans writing units
> and numbers together,
> > ever. A news to me. I am going there tomorrow so I
> will look for it.
> > Otherwise - look at the nutritional labeling in the
> US. No space mandated
> > by the Gov't.
> > Stan Jakuba
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Dennis Brownridge"
> <[email protected]>
> > To: <[email protected]>
> > Sent: 09 Mar 12, Thursday 12:57
> > Subject: Re: [SI] SI10: space between number and unit
> symbol
> >
> >
> >> The main purpose of the mandatory space is
> legibility. It is difficult
> >> to read numbers and letters that are jammed
> together, especially in
> >> complex expressions, just as fiftymeters is harder
> to read than fifty
> >> meters.
> >>
> >> Moreover, whether in symbols or spelled out, the
> number and unit are
> >> individual factors of the quantity and logically
> require a space, which
> >> represents multiplication (50 m means 50 [times]
> meter).
> >>
> >> It is true that the prefix is also multiplied by
> the unit, but no space
> >> is used in that case because they are spelled and
> pronounced as one word
> >> (inseparable, as the BIPM says).
> >>
> >> Furthermore, the widespread American practice has
> always been to leave a
> >> space, whether the units are SI or non-SI.
> It's true that ordinary
> >> Europeans generally fail to leave the space (an
> irritation, when you're
> >> reading European media), but I see no reason to
> introduce this poor
> >> practice in the U.S., which explicitly violates
> the long-established
> >> international rules.
> >>
> >> I agree that we should explain that a
> "non-breaking fixed space should
> >> be used whenever there is danger that a quantity
> may break and wrap to
> >> the next line, or expand in justification."
> It need not be a thin space.
> >>
> >>
> >> Dennis Brownridge
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Bruce Barrow [mailto:[email protected]]
> >> Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2009 08:40
> >> To: [email protected]
> >> Subject: [SI] SI10: space between number and unit
> symbol
> >>
> >> Mr. Bowman:
> >>
> >> Further to Jim's comments below:
> >>
> >> We are here dealing with an editorial style
> question. For a time in my
> >> professional career I was a technical editor, an
> experience that led to
> >> my
> >> discovery of SI nearly fifty years ago. Now I
> chair the joint IEEE/ASTM
> >>
> >> committee that is in the process of revising the
> SI10 standard.
> >>
> >> As you and Jim have noted, you can find a variety
> of recommendations on
> >> style matters. I think it is entirely
> unreasonable to permit
> >> "35-millimeter
> >> film" but not "35-mm film". I
> prefer specifying things that should not
> >> be
> >> touched with a 3-m pole to those that should not
> be touched with a 10-ft
> >>
> >> pole, because I believe in encouraging SI. In
> other words, I believe
> >> that
> >> the choice of unit is more important than the
> style question, and I can
> >> tolerate the hyphen..
> >>
> >> I know that the Brochure and other standards,
> including the current
> >> SI10,
> >> require a space between the number and the unit
> symbol. It is important
> >> to
> >> remember, however, that in fact the number and the
> unit symbol are
> >> closely
> >> associated, and that association should be
> preserved. In practice there
> >> is
> >> frequently no space at all, as with 750mL bottles
> of wine and 10mg
> >> capsules
> >> from the pharmacy, and no space at all seems
> better to me than use of an
> >>
> >> unfettered space. For example, a recent IEEE
> standard I reviewed had a
> >> line
> >> that looked like -- "at least a
> 4.7 m separation
> >> is required". To avoid such an
> appearance I will recommend that we
> >> include in SI10 the restrictions that the space
> should be "thin, fixed,
> >> and
> >> non-breaking". Thin means about the width of
> the letter i, fixed means
> >> that
> >> the space does not expand when the line is
> justified, and non-breaking
> >> means
> >> that the number is not placed at the end of a line
> with the symbol
> >> appearing
> >> on the next line. I personally would be happy to
> amend the current
> >> SI10
> >> and make the space optional, but that view may not
> receive a consensus
> >> in
> >> our committee.
> >>
> >> Perhaps you thought you were asking a simple
> question. Hah!
> >>
> >> Bruce Barrow, Chair
> >> Joint IEEE/ASTM Task Force for SI10
> >>
> >> ----- Original Message -----
> >> From: "James R. Frysinger"
> <[email protected]>
> >> To: "Lyle Bowman"
> <[email protected]>
> >> Cc: <[email protected]>;
> <[email protected]>; <[email protected]>;
> >> <[email protected]>;
> <[email protected]>; <[email protected]>;
> >> <[email protected]>
> >> Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2009 5:02 PM
> >> Subject: Re: SI 10 question
> >>
> >>
> >>> Dear Mr. Bowman,
> >>>
> >>> I am the chair of a committee, some members of
> which represent the
> >> IEEE
> >>> portion of the IEEE/ASTM Joint Committee for
> Maintaining SI 10. Your
> >>> message has been forwarded to me for a reply.
> >>>
> >>> Standard practice in the U.S. is to use a
> space instead of a hyphen
> >> when
> >>> unit symbols are used, whether the expression
> is in noun ("a width of
> >> 35
> >>> mm") or adjectival form ("35 mm
> film"). That would comply with the
> >>> normative statements of IEEE/ASTM SI 10 as
> well as NIST SP 811.
> >> Further,
> >>> and importantly, it complies with Section
> 5.3.3 of the SI Brochure
> >> (8th
> >>> ed.)
> >>>
> >>> Your suggestion to make an explicit statement
> in SI 10 regarding
> >>> application of this practice to the adjectival
> form is noted and will
> >> be
> >>> considered for the revision (update) now in
> progress. Thank you for
> >> that
> >>> thought!
> >>>
> >>> You may have noticed that SP 811 says the
> hyphen "is acceptable" (but
> >> not
> >>> required) in adjectival forms when the unit
> name is spelled out
> >>> ("35-millimeter film"). Personally,
> I prefer using a space there as
> >> well;
> >>> the movement in language is generally toward
> economy of punctuation,
> >>> except as needed to avoid ambiguity.
> >>>
> >>> Thank you very much for your interest in SI
> 10. Most certainly, we are
> >>
> >>> pleased to hear that you are working towards
> improved metrication of
> >> ASTM
> >>> standards. If you have any other questions,
> please do not hesitate to
> >>> write or call.
> >>>
> >>> regards,
> >>> James R. Frysinger (Jim)
> >>> Chair, Standards Coordinating Committee 14
> >>> IEEE Standards Association
> >>>
> >>> [email protected] wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Jim,
> >>>>
> >>>> Please see the communication (below),
> regarding SI 10.
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks,
> >>>>
> ****************************************************************
> >>>> David L. Ringle
> >>>> Manager - IEEE-SA Governance, Policy &
> Procedures
> >>>> IEEE Standards Activities Department
> >>>> 445 Hoes Lane
> Piscataway, NJ 08854-4141
> >> USA
> >>>> TEL: +1 732 562 3806
> >>>> FAX: +1 732 875 0524
> [email protected]
> >>>>
> ****************************************************************
> >>>>
> >>>> March 4, 2009
> >>>>
> >>>> I'm an ASTM member and have been given
> the task of revising the
> >>>> measurement units in many ASTM standards
> to SI units.
> >>>>
> >>>> The IEEE/ASTM SI 10-2002 standard has been
> my primary reference in
> >> doing
> >>>> this task.
> >>>>
> >>>> There's one question that I
> haven't been able to resolve, and that is
> >>
> >>>> whether to place a hyphen between a number
> and an SI unit when the
> >>>> combination is used in an adjectival
> sense. My SI 10 reference
> >> (Section
> >>>> 3.5.1, item d)) says to leave a space
> between a 'numerical value and
> >> a
> >>>> unit symbol', and does not comment on
> the possible adjectival usage.
> >>>>
> >>>> An earlier ASTM E 380 SI Standard says to
> hyphenate when the
> >> combination
> >>>> is used in an adjectival sense, and the
> current NIST Special
> >> Publication
> >>>> 811 (SP 811) says specifically not to
> hyphenate in that situation.
> >>>>
> >>>> Assuming that it's also the intention
> of the IEEE/ASTM 10-2002
> >> standard
> >>>> to not hyphenate when a combination of a
> numerical value and a unit
> >>>> symbol is used in an adjectival sense,
> I'd recommend that a specific
> >>>> statement to that effect be included in
> the standard.
> >>>>
> >>>> I'd appreciate being informed if my
> above assumption is incorrect.
> >>>>
> >>>> Sincerely,
> >>>> Lyle Bowman
> >>>> 728 Montecillo Road
> >>>> San Rafael, CA 96904-3136
> >>>>
> >>>> Phone: 415-479-3004
> >>>>
> >>>> Email: [email protected]
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> James R. Frysinger
> >>> 632 Stony Point Mountain Road
> >>> Doyle, TN 38559-3030
> >>>
> >>> (C) 931.212.0267
> >>> (H) 931.657.3107
> >>> (F) 931.657.3108
> >>>
> >>>
