Actually the Spanish spelling is kilometro, and Portuguese, quilometro.
There are many spelling variations in the SI across languages, but everybody 
uses the same symbols.
Most avoid using SI symbols for non-SI units.  One notable (glaring?) exception 
is "m" for miles in the UK




________________________________
From: Stephen Humphreys <[email protected]>
To: U.S. Metric Association <[email protected]>
Sent: Sat, February 13, 2010 7:03:28 PM
Subject: [USMA:46636] Re: Burma

Hey - Even CNN switch to metric for the international stuff ;-)



'And they used the UK spelling of "kilometre". '

---and French, Irish, spanish etc  :-)


________________________________
Date: Sat, 13 Feb 2010 19:34:14 +0000
From: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: [USMA:46631] Re: Burma


Yes, Stephen, I thought about it some more and came to the same conclusion you 
have.

What threw me off, I think, is that I saw some indications somewhere in the 
Lonely Planet publications that they originate in the UK. But your analogy with 
the BBC World Service sounds right to me. They likely made an editorial 
decision to have just one unit of measure in their publications and that would 
naturally be metric to be (in theory at least) understood world-wide.

Ezra


And they used the UK spelling of "kilometre". 
----- Original Message -----
From: "Stephen Humphreys" <[email protected]>
To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, February 13, 2010 11:10:19 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific
Subject: [USMA:46629] Re: Burma

Not sure.  Some publishers use kiolmetres for international books.  Perhaps 
it's something like that.  Like the way 'BBC World' would say 'The accident 
happened 3 kilometres from the junction' with the exact same feature being 
broadcast as 'The accident happened 2 miles from the junction' in domestic BBC 
stations.  You mention it as a excerpt - was the spelling 'metER' as you 
mention or 'metRE'? 

I can assure you that almost all publications, and other media outlets, would 
use miles over here.  Based on the non-metrication of our roads I'd guess.

________________________________
Date: Sat, 13 Feb 2010 18:34:26 +0000
From: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: [USMA:46627] Re: Burma


But then how does that explain why they gave the distance only in kilometers 
and not both kilometers and miles?

-- Ezra

----- Original Message -----
From: "Stephen Humphreys" <[email protected]>
To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, February 13, 2010 5:40:34 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific
Subject: [USMA:46622] Re: Burma





Ezra:"I noted in one of their (free) excerpts from another part of the book 
that they referred to the length of a particular railway journey in kilometres, 
which I presume was done for the benefit of their (UK) readers."

>
>
>
>Surely you mean 'miles' (UK tracks being in miles and UK citizens usage).  km 
>would be there for Australia for example.
________________________________
Not got a Hotmail account? Sign-up now - Free
________________________________
We want to hear all your funny, exciting and crazy Hotmail stories. Tell us now
________________________________
Do you want a Hotmail account? Sign-up now - Free 

Reply via email to