There is an advantage to using the -re spelling of litre and metre in the US 
and I'm sure the reason has been pointed out before.  It distinguishes it from 
liter (pronounced lighter) and meter (a device used to measure).  In many 
compound words, ending in -meter, the pronunciation is altered and the "m" is 
pronounced as part of the previous syllable.  

Take for example the difference between the pronunciation of micrometre and 
micrometer.  They are not the same.  There is also a difference in 
pronunciation between kilometre and kilometer. 

I think we need to refine the statement that the -re spelling harmonizes with 
the rest of the world to read that it harmonizes with the rest of the English 
speaking world.

Jerry
 




________________________________
From: John Frewen-Lord <[email protected]>
To: U.S. Metric Association <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, April 25, 2009 2:47:47 AM
Subject: [USMA:44842] Re: IEEE/ASTM SI-10

 
I agree with Jerry on this one.  Both spellings are acceptable to me, but the 
-re spelling makes a bit more sense as a whole (and as Jerry points out 
harmonises with the rest of the world).  
 
Still, I would suggest the -re spelling is acceptable in the US.   I don't know 
about the latest editions, but my copy of ASTM E 621 - 84, Standard Practice 
for the Use of Metric (SI) Units in Building Design and Construction (Committee 
E-6 Supplement to E 380) uses the -re spelling throughout (see attached scan).
 
John F-L
----- Original Message ----- 
From: Jeremiah MacGregor 
To: U.S. Metric Association 
Sent: Saturday, April 25, 2009 4:03 AM
Subject: [USMA:44833] Re: IEEE/ASTM SI-10

I can't believe the US is so arrogant that they have to make such an issue over 
spelling.  I don't see why both ways can't be accepted.  We use centre and 
theatre in the US, so why not litre and metre?

Maybe it is time for the US to adopt the ISO and IEC standards.  Being 
different in a global market is the surest way to lose business.  A bankrupt 
economy doesn't have the option to go against the grain.  That is most likely 
the main reason the US is bankrupt.  

Jerry 




________________________________
From: Patrick Moore <[email protected]>
To: U.S. Metric Association <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, April 20, 2009 12:48:35 PM
Subject: [USMA:44783] Re: IEEE/ASTM SI-10

Here are two answers for why to buy IEEE/ASTM SI-10 when BIPM is free.

        1. To spell meter etc., the BIPM uses the spelling –re, which is 
unacceptable in edited American English. I mention this, realizing that some 
readers in this group are livid that metricians in the USA persist in opening 
our eggs at the small end. But there it is, one answer. 
        2. Many ASTM and IEEE standards - and so (we hope) many industry 
contracts - specify use of IEEE/ASTM SI-10. For many purposes in the USA, it 
can achieve regulatory force in a way that BIPM does not.
It would be nice to download IEEE/ASTM SI-10 for free.

I am not making a recommendation here, just answering a question.. My original 
question, asking for the latest edition, was bibliographic.

________________________________
From: Jeremiah MacGregor <[email protected]>
Reply-To: <[email protected]>
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2009 19:04:56 -0700 (PDT)
To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]>
Subject: [USMA:44717] Re: IEEE/ASTM SI-10

Why pay for a publication from the ANSI when the same information is available 
for free from the BIPM.
 
http://www.bipm.org/en/si/
 
Jerry

________________________________
From: John M. Steele <[email protected]>
To: U.S. Metric Association <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, April 15, 2009 12:01:31 PM
Subject: [USMA:44688] Re: IEEE/ASTM SI-10

Latest edition is 2002.  Here is a link to it at ANSI:
http://webstore.ansi.org/RecordDetail.aspx?sku=SI10-2002
 
That edition corresponds to 7th edition of SI Brochure.  I understand it is 
currently being revised to latest edition of SI Brochure and NIST SP 330.  I 
don't know the schedule, or the extent of revisions.
.
--- On Wed, 4/15/09, Patrick Moore <[email protected]> wrote:

From: Patrick Moore <[email protected]>
Subject: [USMA:44687] IEEE/ASTM SI-10
To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]>
Date: Wednesday, April 15, 2009, 11:29 AM

What is the latest publication year/edition of IEEE/ASTM SI-10, "Standard  for 
the Use of the International System of Units (SI): The Modern Metric  System"?  
  It is difficult to find it in the ASTM catalog or website or the IEEE site:  
many documents reference it but the standard itself does not come up, for me  
anyway.    Thanks.    


      

Reply via email to