Dear Gene,

i was unaware of your prior efforts to suggest a scheme of upper casing of 
symbols for multiples greater than one to the SI Consultive Committee on Units 
(CCU). 

speaking for myself, i don't have a problem with an upper casing of the prefix 
symbol 'K' for kilo. 

at the same time, i can respect the tradition of a lower casing of the prefix 
symbol 'k' for kilo (which is specified in recent versions of the SI).  

although i do not wish to speculate why the CCU did not update the expression 
of prefix symbols for multiples greater than one in terms of a scheme of an 
upper case  symbol; i also haven't seen a rationale for the upper casing of 
symbols for multiples greater than one, or for the lower casing of symbols for 
submultiples (or multiples less than one). moreover, i haven't seen a rationale 
for maintaining exceptions to these schemes in standards documents. 

although updates for these identified improvements might not be on a fast 
track, i would not give up hope for their practicable use with SI. 

for my part I will copy this information to AAT ICAS to be sure that a 
specification of the casing of symbols for 'deca' and 'hecto' are not ignored 
in subsequent revisions of the AAT ICAS 0600s08 
(http://www.aatideas.org/iota/dv/0600.xht#go0600s08) considerations on the 
review of case structure of metric prefixes. 

Cheers,

Ron

ps - was it y2k or y2K or Y2k or Y2K?



On 2010 Jun 16 Wed DoY 167, at 12:16, <[email protected]> 
<[email protected]> wrote:

> 
> Many years ago, I proposed to the SI Consultive Committee on Units (CCU) that 
> all prefixes for multiples greater than one
> be in upper case symbols, *allowing* D, H, and K.
> 
> The Chairman appeared to have supported my proposal, even with some 
> enthusiasm, but the Committee decided to stay with only the traditional 
> symbols, to my great disappointment.
> 
> Changes (improvements) in SI are not easily accomplished.
> 
> Gene.
>> ---- Original message ----
>>> Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2010 23:18:19 -0400
>>> From: "Ametrica" <[email protected]>  
>>> Subject: [USMA:47810] RE: The Oil Leak (Estimate)  Increases Again  
>>> To:...
>> <
>>>  It would be easier to understand if the symbol for
>>>  deka was "D".  Since we have "m" for milli and "M"
>>>  for mega, there would be no conflict with deci,
>>>  which is "d".  It would also reduce the symbol from
>>>  two letters to one letter.  What do you think?
>>> 
>>>  I also think hecto should be "H" and kilo "K"...
> 

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 
- - - - - -

Ron Stone

e:
     [email protected]

web:
     http://www.enhanceability.com

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 
- - - - - -
     this message does not necessarily reflect
     the views of any organization I may be affiliated with,
     and should be regarded as personal opinion.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 
- - - - - -



Reply via email to