Most to the point was my comment that "New SI" was misleading and
potentially upsetting for some folks. Secondarily, I suggested "New SI
Definitions". I favor calling things what they are.
Jim
On 2011-02-23 1250, [email protected] wrote:
Jim,
What phrase have you proposed to the CCU to replace the misleading words "New
SI"?
I suggest "Making SI More Precise" or "SI Becoming More Precise" or "Coming Greater Precision of
SI" or "SI to become More Precise" to replace "New SI" which we agree is an improvement of SI *not* a
New SI.
Gene.
---- Original message ----
Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2011 11:33:14 -0600
From: "James R. Frysinger"<[email protected]>
Subject: [USMA:49911] Re: New BIPM web page on the "New SI" -- possible revision
To: "U.S. Metric Association"<[email protected]>
Dear Colleagues,
I have conveyed to some key people in the CCU and the BIPM the common
concerns that were expressed here regarding the use of the phrase "New
SI" and regarding the need for an explicit declaration on stability in
the magnitude of the units, notably the kilogram. They have taken those
matters under advisement and are considering editorial actions they
might take. We thus could see some revisions to this new page on the
BIPM website or in one or more of the listed articles -- or both -- in
the near future. So, please help me keep an eye on that material.
...
--
James R. Frysinger
632 Stony Point Mountain Road
Doyle, TN 38559-3030
(C) 931.212.0267
(H) 931.657.3107
(F) 931.657.3108
