On  Mar 5 , at 6:05 PM, Pierre Abbat wrote:
> On Friday 05 March 2010 17:36:29 Bill Hooper wrote:
>> ... the same codes for various special characters ... like ...
>> the SI prefix micro-, l.c. mu (µ), 

> The mu is not actually a mu 
> (μ), ... but a micro sign (µ), 

I find it difficult to comprehend the statement that "the mu is not actually a 
mu (µ)". If it looks like a mu it's a mu. They may come in different styles 
(like italics, bold face, different type faces, etc.) but they are all mu's.

I note that GCPM specifies that SI symbols are written in upright type (NOT 
italics) but I don't know the method of producing the mu in upright; I have to 
use italics or nothing.

But it's still a mu, at least.

Furthermore, calling it the micro-  sign is circular reasoning. The symbol for 
micro- is DEFINED as the Greek lower case mu. Yes, it is therefore the micro- 
symbol (by definition) but it is nevertheless still a mu.

Old Saying:
---------------------------------
If it looks like a duck,
and it walks like a duck 
and quacks like a duck, 
it is probably A DUCK!



Bill Hooper
1810 mm tall
Fernandina Beach, Florida, USA

==========================
   SImplification Begins With SI.
==========================




Reply via email to