The purists will argue that the use of cubic metres is preferable to the use of litres. However, I regard litres and cubic meters as interchangeable in the same way that metres and kilomtres are interchangeable (ie for values below 1000 litres/metres, I will usually use litres/metres, for values above 2000 metres/litres, I will usually use kilometres/cubic metres and between these two, I will use either, depending on which is more appropriate).
----- Original Message ----- From: "Philip S Hall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, April 18, 2006 7:02 AM Subject: [USMA:36594] RE: Kiloliters > >It makes a lot sense to use in this context. I realize that many will make > the argument for the cubic meter but I feel that when discussing > containerized quantities, liters make more sense. I can visualize a liter > easier (and more to the point, relate to direct personal experience) than I > can a cubic meter. > I'd have thought that quite the reverse is true for large volumes. Still > each to his own I guess. > The important thing is that the metric system is *flexible*. Expressing > volumes by counting litres rather than cubic metre causes no great > difficulty, just as length in cm is no real problem for those who prefer mm > because we can convert it so easily. > Phil Hall >
