home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!munnari.oz.au!manuel.anu.edu.au!coombs!gsc
- From: gsc@coombs.anu.edu.au (Sean Case)
- Newsgroups: comp.std.internat
- Subject: Re: ISO paper sizes
- Date: 5 Jan 93 11:00:36 GMT
- Organization: Australian National University
- Lines: 27
- Message-ID: <gsc.726231636@coombs>
- References: <1i9j4gEINN8nd@uni-erlangen.de> <1993Jan4.170125.3951@infodev.cam.ac.uk>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: 150.203.76.2
-
- ag129@cus.cam.ac.uk (Alasdair Grant) writes:
-
- >1 SI inch is 2.54mm _exactly_, not just to 7 decimal places.
- >But the people who don't use ISO paper sizes don't use SI inches
- >either, they use NIST inches, which differ from SI inches well before
- >the 8th decimal place. (I don't know the exact details - after all,
- >why should I know about American internal standards?)
-
- >Does the persistence of the NIST inch have anything to do with the
- >US public's huge stock of old guns needing new ammo machined to low
- >tolerances? Britain had no problems redefining its Imperial measures
- >as SI multiples... I wonder.
-
- The story I heard related to land title.
-
- The whole of the contiguous United States has been surveyed from a
- baseline on the East Coast. Changing the value of the inch even
- slightly would create major hassles for landowners on the West Coast,
- since land boundaries are defined by reference to survey points.
-
- Does anyone from the US know anything about this?
-
- Sean Case
- --
- Sean Case gsc@coombs.anu.edu.au
- "[...] if a poststructuralist doesn't get you,
- a deconstructionist will."--Ursula K. LeGuin
-