0.3048 m according to my ConvertPad app on my phone - and according to
Wikipedia (so that must be true!)
Regards,Peter
(PeterPann99)
On Sunday, 28 January 2024 at 19:36:06 GMT, Philip Barnes
<p...@trigpoint.me.uk> wrote:
The legal definition of a foot is of course 0.348 m.
"Since an international agreement in 1959, the foot is defined as equal to
exactly 0.3048 metres'.
Phil (trigpoint)
On 28 January 2024 18:57:45 GMT, Minh Nguyen <m...@nguyen.cincinnati.oh.us>
wrote:
Vào lúc 04:08 2024-01-28, Greg Troxel đã viết:
Minh Nguyen <m...@nguyen.cincinnati.oh.us> writes:
Vào lúc 19:50 2024-01-27, Brian M. Sperlongano đã viết:
Uh so I did the math, and unless I've got this wrong, the difference
between survey feet and international feet for tagging, let's say,
Mount Everest, is less than seven one-hundredths of an inch. So I'm
really not even sure why we're discussing it beyond the fact that
we're all nerds about this sort of thing.
You got me. :-) The actual proposal doesn't mention the foot's two
definitions at all, and so far I'm planning to keep it that way.
I think it's important to be definitionally correct, even if it doesn't
really matter. It's a slippery slope, and pretty soon \pi is 3.
Poor Indiana. ;-) The definition of the foot would apply to the ' and ft
abbreviations in every context, not just the ele=* key, so I'd suggest
considering it separately, probably without the formality of a vote. The main
unit symbol listing has come together more informally over the years. [1]
Sooner or later, OpenHistoricalMap will have a lot of fun with this issue...
[1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Map_features/Units
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
