John, i have paraphrased the three items in [USMA:51713] for evaluating metrication in the United States as follows.
metric (SI, and so forth) measures are either required or permitted, on a standalone basis, for all commercial or mandated measurement purposes. other (customary, inch-pound, and so forth) measures would never be required nor permitted on a standalone basis for commercial or mandated measurement purposes. dual presentation of metric and other measures can be permitted for commercial or mandated measurement purposes if the other measures are presented as supplementary information. some good questions would also be 1) how much of the US economy could be considered to be already metric? 2) how much of the US economy could metricate within one or two fiscal cycles? 3) what is the economic value of those areas of the economy that are already metric? i would think that the answers to #1 and #2 are both more than 50%, although i am not sure how much more. i would think that the answer to #3 is more than 70%, although how much more i also couldn't say. SIncerely, Ron Stone On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 3:28 AM, John M. Steele <[email protected]>wrote: > We are neither 100% metric nor 100% Customary. We are either > "semi-metric" or "all screwed up." > > I would propose the country can't be considered fully metric until the > following is true. Metric measure is either required or allowed, on a > standalone basis, for all measurement purposes. Customary is never > required nor acceptable on a standalone basis. Dual is allowed, but the > Customary is only supplemental information. > > -- ----------------- Ron Stone ---------------------------- on Twitter (at) photonron --------------------------------------------------------- disclaimers or other restrictions may apply to this message. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
