On 2009/08/04, at 8:49 AM, James R. Frysinger wrote:
I find insistence that some SI prefixes are inherently better than
others to be rather condescending and needlessly imperious. But,
then, I'm known for being an old and independent-minded grump.
Dear Jim,
You're right. And I plead guilty as charged.
However, you might be able to help with the problem I have in this
regard.
I have observed that metrication can be done quickly, smoothly, and
cheaply.
To do this, the common factor is to choose a single prefix that will
favor whole numbers, make it a policy for everyone to use, and then
get on with your life.
That's it – the metrication process is then almost automatic.
Remember that I am approaching this issue from the point of view of
someone who cares about the metrication process. I am not involved in
metrology or in writing standards or conventions so the goal for me is
always about how quickly an organisation can upgrade to the full use
of the metric system.
Cheers,
Pat Naughtin
Author of the forthcoming book, Metrication Leaders Guide.
PO Box 305 Belmont 3216,
Geelong, Australia
Phone: 61 3 5241 2008
Metric system consultant, writer, and speaker, Pat Naughtin, has
helped thousands of people and hundreds of companies upgrade to the
modern metric system smoothly, quickly, and so economically that they
now save thousands each year when buying, processing, or selling for
their businesses. Pat provides services and resources for many
different trades, crafts, and professions for commercial, industrial
and government metrication leaders in Asia, Europe, and in the USA.
Pat's clients include the Australian Government, Google, NASA, NIST,
and the metric associations of Canada, the UK, and the USA. See http://www.metricationmatters.com
for more metrication information, contact Pat at [email protected]
or to get the free 'Metrication matters' newsletter go to: http://www.metricationmatters.com/newsletter
to subscribe.
