Hmm... Is that so? Very interesting point, Louis. I wasn't aware of that. Well... In any case, it wouldn't change the idea behind my proposal. If it's BIPM, CGPM or some OIML, some body should act as the scientific depository of knowledge on this issue for *global* use. And local (at country level) bodies would HAVE to be subject to such ultimate authority.
However, I still have the distinction impression that this function is falling more on BIPM's shoulders, since they're the ones involved in the technical research, development and official definition of the SI system. Therefore, perhaps they would still be the prime candidate to fulfill this role, IMHO. Marcus On Wed, 10 Apr 2002 12:53:39 Louis JOURDAN wrote: >At 16:21 -0700 2002/04/9, Ma Be wrote: >>Hello, folks, >> >>Please allow me to submit a new idea before you. This whole debate >>I and Jim have been having on SI frameworking got me thinking. >> >>How about we focus our efforts on getting countries around the world >>to yield authority on the issue of system of units to the "local" >>standards bodies, which, evidently, in turn, would be subject to the >>highest *international* authority on the issue, BIPM, for example >>(given that this is a science issue and science has NO frontiers, >>issues of sovereignty should not be a concern). In other words, >>when it comes to the use of units of measurements, ALL stakeholders >>in the society should use what such authoritative bodies would >>stipulate as "legal". > >Certainly a good idea, Marcus, but I doubt that the BIPM (or, rather, >the CGPM) is the appropriate body. The Treaty of Metre does not give >its executive bodies any authority in spreading the Metric System or >SI. > >It is more the mission of the OIML, the International Organization >for Legal Metrology. See >http://www.oiml.org/ >I am not sure however that the OIML has more power than the CGPM... > >Louis > > Is your boss reading your email? ....Probably Keep your messages private by using Lycos Mail. Sign up today at http://mail.lycos.com
