It's that d* mned AP Stylebook again - pretty much every newspaper adheres to it as their Bible.
Carleton ----- Original Message ----- From: "Martin Vlietstra" <[email protected]> To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, April 18, 2011 9:02:30 AM Subject: [USMA:50369] Re: Alfa Romeo Readies a Stirring Stateside Return Hi John, I made a small contribution – the bit showing the various languages. I will certainly add your reference – it is very useful. Regards From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of John M. Steele Sent: 18 April 2011 13:52 To: U.S. Metric Association Subject: [USMA:50368] Re: Alfa Romeo Readies a Stirring Stateside Return Yes, that might be useful too. Are you the author? It would be useful if the article points out that on dual unit speedometers in the US, FMVSS101 requires km/h (upper case is allowed) and does not permit kph, or any variant of it. Therefore a driver sees kph only in car reviews and not on his dash, adding confusion. This was addressed in my note to the author. (NOTE: If you are the author and need a reference, see USMA laws page for FMVSS101 reference.) My personal goal for the year is to stamp out the kilo-pico-hour. Because of dashboard confusion and FMVSS101, I am thinking automotive writers may be the best place to apply leverage (in addition to storm reporters, after rolling over the Natiuonal Hurricane Center). From: Martin Vlietstra <[email protected]> To: [email protected]; U.S. Metric Association <[email protected]> Sent: Mon, April 18, 2011 8:04:55 AM Subject: RE: [USMA:50366] Alfa Romeo Readies a Stirring Stateside Return You could also point him to the Wikipedia article at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kilometres_per_hour. From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of John M. Steele Sent: 18 April 2011 12:16 To: U.S. Metric Association Subject: [USMA:50366] Alfa Romeo Readies a Stirring Stateside Return http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704662604576257300108686920.html?mod=googlenews_wsj The author of this car review expresses strong advocacy for the metric system in the body of his review, but then goes on to use the dreaded "kph" and mostly Customary specs for the vehicle. He does express strong support for liters per 100 kilometers as a fuel economy measure. I have sent a note thanking him for the metric support, pointing out that "km/h" is the correct symbol, not "kph," and suggesting one way to show metric support is to use metric specs or at least dual units for all specs in his reviews.
