Dear Nat, I must be feeling a bit picky this morning. I have paraphrased your paragraph.
You wrote: On 2007 06 1 4:34 AM, "Nat Hager III" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > In a metricated US 50 years from now, the new tower would be listed as 541.5 > m high, which translates to 1776 "feet", where "foot" was a popular unit of > measure in the US back around 2007. But I think it would be more accurate to say: In a metricated US 50 years from now, the new tower would be listed as 541 metres high with this note: "This tower was designed to be 1776 'feet' high where 'foot' was a popular word used to describe an exact measure of 304.8 millimetres in the USA back around 2007. Nobody fully understood at that time why the word foot was used for that exact metric measure." Sorry about this but, as I said, I must be in a picky mood. Cheers, Pat Naughtin PO Box 305 Belmont 3216 Geelong, Australia 61 3 5241 2008 Pat Naughtin is manager of http://www.metricationmatters.com an internet website that focuses on the many issues, methods and processes that individuals, groups, companies, and nations use when upgrading to the metric system. Contact Pat Naughtin at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
