Pat,
Two points:
*On 2 L drink bottles, this is factually incorrect.  Statement of the required 
contents in Customary was required since 1966 under FPLA (before the 2 L bottle 
was introduced).  Supplemental metric was allowed until 1994, when its addition 
was required.  At the moment, omitting either is illegal.  Wine and spirits are 
a bit different.  Both the size and metric declaration are mandatory.  
Customary 
is permitted in addition.  However, the 2 L bottle is a good example where the 
public thinks 2 L and not the cumbersome 2 QT 3.6 FL OZ (67.6 FL OZ) which is 
also legally required.

*If you have Excel, you have an excellent double precision floating point 
resource, although you have to fuss with formatting to display all that 
precision. I use an HP15C calculator, and when 10 digits isn't enough, I also 
use a virtual RPN calculator on the web which uses double precision floating 
point.

If we ever get more converted, I don't want people saving the inch to define 
the 
gallon.  We can push all Customary units to completely rigorous metric 
definitions.  Whether that really helps is debatable, but I don't see how it 
can 
hurt.  Intermediate Customary definitions are not required and needn't be 
preserved (like 231 in³/gallon).




________________________________


Consider the upgrade to two litre drink bottles. A decision was made to use 
this 
size within the management structure of one of the drink companies (possibly 
because they could buy cheap moulding machines on the world market). No attempt 
was made to provide customary equivalents using "metric conversion" and none 
proved to be necessary. The public soon bought drinks in these bottles, got 
used 
to the two litre size, and then - in a few days - got on with their lives.

Reply via email to