Hi Euric, The publisher obviously prefers customary-only, so why not accept dual units as a reasonable compromise? Here's the reply I got from the publisher:
>Thanks for your feedback. The idea behind not including metric >measurements was in consideration of readers who aren't familiar with >metrics. It wasn't to infer that scientists and geologists are studying >in inches and miles. > >But I appreciate your suggestion and recognize that the inclusion of >metrics does have value for many readers as well. So we will go back to >including metrics when they are used. I in turn recognize that many of the newspaper's readers are not familiar with some SI units. So while I see no need for customary equivalents for well known units like meters and liters, I can see a good argument for giving customary equivalents for units like newtons and pascals. Are you quite certain that unit symbols should only be used after numbers? I would appreciate it if you could point out where this is documented. John On Friday 23 April 2004 14:50, Mighty Chimp wrote: > I don't quite understand what you mean in your last paragraph about ...." > possibly adding the customary-unit equivalent in parentheses when needed > for clarity. ". This implies to me that only when FFU is present is there > clarity in understanding. In that case, why bother to use SI at all? They > can continue to use FFU in order to maintain clarity. > > In my opinion, the dual use of units adds confusion. Forget FFU all > together. > > You also state: "I would be happy to provide information about correct SI > usage if you have any questions.". Before this you wrote: "SI units like > centimeters, meters, km, liters, grams, > kilograms, etc.". Here you express kilometres as "km" which is wrong in > this context. The correct use of the unit symbols is after numbers. > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "J. Ward" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Thursday, 2004-04-22 20:53 > Subject: [USMA:29614] Letter to newspaper > > > Hi, > > > > I just sent the following comments to the writers of the Jet Propulsion > > Laboratory's newspaper. It's a good newspaper, except they usually > > convert > > > all measurements to FFU. > > > > John > > > > > > I really enjoy reading the Universe, but sometimes wonder why so many > > articles seem to intentionally avoid the metric system? For example, in > > the articles today about the meteorite-like rock found on Mars and > > satellites seen by Cassini, distances are quoted only in inches and > > miles. > > > > I find it very hard to believe that planetary scientists and geologists > > are > > > really studying the heavens in inches and miles. The official measuring > > system world-wide (including the U.S.) is called the International System > > of Units (SI). I think most JPL readers would not have trouble > > understanding SI units like centimeters, meters, km, liters, grams, > > kilograms, etc. > > > > I suggest you always give measurements in SI, possibly adding the > > customary-unit equivalent in parentheses when needed for clarity. I > > would > > > > be happy to provide information about correct SI usage if you have any > > questions. > > > > Thank you for your consideration,
