standard to metric converter program

[piaseckiac]

I am producing a website on air and need a link to change the entire
website from standard to metric for temperature, pressure,
miles-kilometers, and volume. Thank you.

[Joe]

"piaseckiac" <pi********@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:64**************************@posting.google.c om...

I am producing a website on air and need a link to change the entire
website from standard to metric for temperature, pressure,
miles-kilometers, and volume. Thank you.

http://www.initium.demon.co.uk/converts/metimp.htm. That what your looking
for?
--
To reply direct, remove NOSPAM and replace with railwaysonline
For Train Information, The Latest News & Best photos around check out the
Award Winning Railways
Online at http://www.railwaysonline.co.uk

[Evertjan.]

piaseckiac wrote on 27 okt 2003 in comp.lang.javascript:

I am producing a website on air and need a link to change the entire
website from standard to metric for temperature, pressure,
miles-kilometers, and volume. Thank you.

I thought metric was standard?
<http://dbhs.wvusd.k12.ca.us/Humor/Funny-Metric-Chart.html>
More comprehensive:
<http://ts.nist.gov/ts/htdocs/200/202/mpo_home.htm>

--
Evertjan.
The Netherlands.
(Please change the x'es to dots in my emailaddress)

[HikksNotAtHome]

In article <Xn********************@194.109.133.29>, "Evertjan."
<ex**************@interxnl.net> writes:

I thought metric was standard?

Its an Americanism to call inches/feet and such "Standard" and is indicative of
a lack of understanding of the fact that the web is world wide, where the
"Standard" is inded Metric (as you knew).
--
Randy

[Lee]

HikksNotAtHome said:

In article <Xn********************@194.109.133.29>, "Evertjan."
<ex**************@interxnl.net> writes:

I thought metric was standard?

Its an Americanism to call inches/feet and such "Standard" and is indicative of
a lack of understanding of the fact that the web is world wide, where the
"Standard" is inded Metric (as you knew).

No, that's a silly, bigoted notion. It has nothing to do with
lack of understanding of the web. It's the very reasonable
result of having been taught in school, in marketing materials,
and in industry that there are two measuring systems, called
"Standard" and "Metric".

Froogle for a "standard socket set" and for "metric socket set"
and you'll see that the point of confusion is not in the OP.
That's simply the most common way the systems are referenced.
It's no more incorrect than calling an apartment a "flat".

[Evertjan.]

Lee wrote on 28 okt 2003 in comp.lang.javascript:

No, that's a silly, bigoted notion. It has nothing to do with
lack of understanding of the web. It's the very reasonable
result of having been taught in school, in marketing materials,
and in industry that there are two measuring systems, called
"Standard" and "Metric".

Froogle for a "standard socket set" and for "metric socket set"
Those webpages are ment for a country/region specific "audience".
Usenet, or at least this NG is pretty worldwide.
and you'll see that the point of confusion is not in the OP.
That's simply the most common way the systems are referenced.
But it is. It is an affront to the cyberworld to take it for granted that
the readers of a posing know, even without specific warning, that the OP
includes American, no U.S. specific meaning to a keyword.

If I wrote "standard-" vs "u.s.-measures" you would be confused perhaps
too.

Even that lack of understanding inside the U.S. has led to a multimillion
dollar crash on Mars.
It's no more incorrect than calling an apartment a "flat".

Again, this depends on the audience.

--
Evertjan.
The Netherlands.
(Please change the x'es to dots in my emailaddress)

[Lee]

Evertjan. said:

Lee wrote on 28 okt 2003 in comp.lang.javascript:

No, that's a silly, bigoted notion. It has nothing to do with
lack of understanding of the web. It's the very reasonable
result of having been taught in school, in marketing materials,
and in industry that there are two measuring systems, called
"Standard" and "Metric".

Froogle for a "standard socket set" and for "metric socket set"
Those webpages are ment for a country/region specific "audience".
Usenet, or at least this NG is pretty worldwide.

The point is to demonstrate that "standard" is a correct way
to refer to the "English" measurement system in US English,
and is not, as the previous poster suggested, meant to suggest
that it is the international standard system of measurement.

and you'll see that the point of confusion is not in the OP.
That's simply the most common way the systems are referenced.

But it is. It is an affront to the cyberworld to take it for granted that
the readers of a posing know, even without specific warning, that the OP
includes American, no U.S. specific meaning to a keyword.

Nonsense. Any English-speaker who can't figure out what
"standard" means when contrasted with "metric" shouldn't
be trying to use a keyboard without supervision.
If I wrote "standard-" vs "u.s.-measures" you would be confused perhaps
too.
No. The contrast makes it obvious.
Even that lack of understanding inside the U.S. has led to a multimillion
dollar crash on Mars.

Not at all. That crash was caused by the complete failure
to specify the measurement system, not by misunderstanding
"standard" vs "metric".

It's no more incorrect than calling an apartment a "flat".

Again, this depends on the audience.

No, as long as the meaning is as obvious as "standard" is,
when contrasted to "metric", it's perfectly reasonable for
a person to post in their local idiomatic language.

I refuse to believe that anybody who responded to the OP was
confused by the meaning. They were simply looking for a
chance to tweak an American nose. There are plenty of good
examples of American stupidity in this newsgroup and elsewhere,
but there are also plenty of good examples of anti-American
bigotry and ignorance.

[Evertjan.]

Lee wrote on 28 okt 2003 in comp.lang.javascript:

I refuse to believe that anybody who responded to the OP was
confused by the meaning. They were simply looking for a
chance to tweak an American nose.

As "they" was me, you could have seen my jokingly staged confusion was
followed by a correct help link, more to the OP's point but forgotten in
the follow up.

--
Evertjan.
The Netherlands.
(Please change the x'es to dots in my emailaddress)

[Lee]

Evertjan. said:

Lee wrote on 28 okt 2003 in comp.lang.javascript:

I refuse to believe that anybody who responded to the OP was
confused by the meaning. They were simply looking for a
chance to tweak an American nose.

As "they" was me, you could have seen my jokingly staged confusion was
followed by a correct help link, more to the OP's point but forgotten in
the follow up.

No, actually, I don't think I ever read your original response,
and wouldn't have objected to some good-natured teasing about it.
My objection is to the characterization of the use of the term
"standard" as:

"... indicative of a lack of understanding of the fact that
the web is world wide, ..."

when, in fact, the term "standard" in this case has become an
idiomatic name for the measurement system, which has lost most
of the original meaning of being used universally.

At one time it was common to call it the "English" system of
measurement, but that became confusing when the UK dropped it.

[Dr John Stockton]

JRS: In article <64**************************@posting.google.com >, seen
in news:comp.lang.javascript, piaseckiac <pi********@hotmail.com> posted
at Mon, 27 Oct 2003 10:42:48 :-

I am producing a website on air and need a link to change the entire
website from standard to metric for temperature, pressure,
miles-kilometers, and volume. Thank you.

Obviously an isolationist who does not realise, or does not care, or
does not understand, that Internet News is an international medium; and
that, as regards units of measurement, the USA is the odd man out, with
everywhere else using the SI ("metric") system for almost all purposes.

Well, perhaps not the only one; perhaps Myanmar and Liberia still use
Imperial units.

Measurements of ambient temperature look strange in Kelvins, though.

--
© John Stockton, Surrey, UK. ?@merlyn.demon.co.uk / ??*********@physics.org ©
Web <URL:http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/> - FAQish topics, acronyms, & links.
Correct <= 4-line sig. separator as above, a line precisely "-- " (SoRFC1036)
Do not Mail News to me. Before a reply, quote with ">" or "> " (SoRFC1036)

[RIck Measham]

piaseckiac wrote:

I am producing a website on air and need a link to change the entire
website from standard to metric for temperature, pressure,
miles-kilometers, and volume. Thank you.

If you're just looking for a way to convert static imperial values to static
metric values, then Google is your friend. Do a goodle search for:

20 inches in centimeters

It knows a hell of a lot, including imaginary numbers:

sqrt(-4)

returns "-2i" !!!

There's a huge number of units it understands for conversions too:

100 pounds * 1 inch in calories

Hope this helps!
Cheers
Rick
--
Obviously the reply-to is a fake. Just change the 'spam-' to 'i' so that the
result sounds like why you go to an optometerist.

[Fabian]

Lee hu kiteb:

Evertjan. said:

Those webpages are ment for a country/region specific "audience".
Usenet, or at least this NG is pretty worldwide.

The point is to demonstrate that "standard" is a correct way
to refer to the "English" measurement system in US English,
and is not, as the previous poster suggested, meant to suggest
that it is the international standard system of measurement.

Unless you are writing for a specific national audience, it is bad style
to use words for a specific meaning that is used only in that country.

But it is. It is an affront to the cyberworld to take it for granted
that the readers of a posing know, even without specific warning,
that the OP includes American, no U.S. specific meaning to a keyword.

Nonsense. Any English-speaker who can't figure out what
"standard" means when contrasted with "metric" shouldn't
be trying to use a keyboard without supervision.

I do believe there are many people on the Internet, including this
particular newsgroup, whose first language is NOT English.
I refuse to believe that anybody who responded to the OP was
confused by the meaning. They were simply looking for a
chance to tweak an American nose.

In my country, "standard" (yes, its even an English-speaking country!
English is an official language!) refers to units such as the xiber and
the pulzier. Are these maybe what you had in mind?

--
--
Fabian
Visit my website often and for long periods!
http://www.lajzar.co.uk

[Dr John Stockton]

JRS: In article <bn*********@drn.newsguy.com>, seen in
news:comp.lang.javascript, Lee <RE**************@cox.net> posted at Tue,
28 Oct 2003 06:39:25 :-

But it is. It is an affront to the cyberworld to take it for granted that
the readers of a posing know, even without specific warning, that the OP
includes American, no U.S. specific meaning to a keyword.

Nonsense. Any English-speaker who can't figure out what
"standard" means when contrasted with "metric" shouldn't
be trying to use a keyboard without supervision.

It is not a question of understanding, but of good manners.

Outside the USA, it is widely realised that most Americans know or care
little for the ways of the rest of the world. This is, in fact, why
shooting, etc., at Americans is such a popular pastime in the more
excitable countries.

The technology is not yet (AFAIK) available to do that over the
Internet, so we just do what we can to teach better ways to the Merkins,
or at least to point out to others how wrong they are.

Most who can read English are in countries where Metric is the standard.

--
© John Stockton, Surrey, UK. ?@merlyn.demon.co.uk Turnpike v4.00 IE 4 ©
<URL:http://jibbering.com/faq/> Jim Ley's FAQ for news:comp.lang.javascript
<URL:http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/js-index.htm> JS maths, dates, sources.
<URL:http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/> TP/BP/Delphi/JS/&c., FAQ topics, links.

[Pat Norton]

Lee wrote:

Even that lack of understanding inside the U.S. has

led to a multimillion dollar crash on Mars.

That crash was caused by the complete failure to
specify the measurement system, not by
misunderstanding "standard" vs "metric".

The specification mandated metric units. The subcontractor, Lockheed
Martin, failed use metric units.

The official report says:
"The MCO MIB [Mars Climate Orbiter Mishap Investigation Board] has
determined that the root cause for the loss of the MCO spacecraft was
the failure to use metric units in the coding of a ground software
file, "Small Forces," used in trajectory models. Specifically,
thruster performance data in English units instead of metric units was
used in the software application code titled SM_FORCES (smallforces).
The output from the SM_FORCES application code as required by a MSOP
Project Software Interface Specification (SIS) was to be in metric
units of Newton-seconds (N-s). Instead, the data was reported in
English units of pound-seconds (lbf-s). The Angular Momentum
Desaturation (AMD) file contained the output data from the SM_FORCES
software. The SIS, which was not followed, defines both the format and
units of the AMD file generated by ground-based computers."
http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/codeq/...mib_report.pdf

[Lee]

Dr John Stockton said:

JRS: In article <bn*********@drn.newsguy.com>, seen in
news:comp.lang.javascript, Lee <RE**************@cox.net> posted at Tue,
28 Oct 2003 06:39:25 :-

But it is. It is an affront to the cyberworld to take it for granted that
the readers of a posing know, even without specific warning, that the OP
includes American, no U.S. specific meaning to a keyword.

Nonsense. Any English-speaker who can't figure out what
"standard" means when contrasted with "metric" shouldn't
be trying to use a keyboard without supervision.

It is not a question of understanding, but of good manners.

Outside the USA, it is widely realised that most Americans know or care
little for the ways of the rest of the world. This is, in fact, why
shooting, etc., at Americans is such a popular pastime in the more
excitable countries.

The technology is not yet (AFAIK) available to do that over the
Internet, so we just do what we can to teach better ways to the Merkins,
or at least to point out to others how wrong they are.

Not only have you missed the entire point, but you've also managed
to preach good manners while endorsing shooting people. How does
that foot taste?

[Richard Cornford]

"Dr John Stockton" <sp**@merlyn.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:e3**************@merlyn.demon.co.uk...
<snip>

Outside the USA, it is widely realised that most Americans
know or care little for the ways of the rest of the world.
This is, in fact, why shooting, etc., at Americans is such
a popular pastime in the more excitable countries.

<snip>

I am disappointed on purely logical grounds that you should propose this
as a cause and effect relationship, and especially that you would state
it as factual.

My experience of the population of the UK is that the majority know and
care little for the ways of the rest of the world. And my impression of
the world population as a whole is that a significant proportion are too
busy trying to survive to spare much thought for the peoples of distant
lands.

But the generalisations are irrelevant. Ignorance (of one thing or
another) is widespread, inevitable and ultimately curable. The
individual, upon being exposed to the notion that there are more ways of
looking at any situation than just their own personal perspective, may
prove to be too arrogant, self important and xenophobic to react with
anything but hostility, then again they may recognise the reality of the
situation, slap themselves on the forehead and never make the same
mistake again.

There is a danger in making generalisations about populations, nations,
races, cultures, groups, etc. Individuals deserve to be judged by (and
responsible for) their own actions.

Richard.

[HikksNotAtHome]

In article <bn********@drn.newsguy.com>, Lee <RE**************@cox.net> writes:

As "they" was me, you could have seen my jokingly staged confusion was
followed by a correct help link, more to the OP's point but forgotten in
the follow up.
No, actually, I don't think I ever read your original response,
and wouldn't have objected to some good-natured teasing about it.
My objection is to the characterization of the use of the term
"standard" as:

"... indicative of a lack of understanding of the fact that
the web is world wide, ..."

Which would make me the "they". And if I weren't American, I probably wouldn't
find this whole conversation hilariously funny.
when, in fact, the term "standard" in this case has become an
idiomatic name for the measurement system, which has lost most
of the original meaning of being used universally.
And if you go to just about any non-American country and ask "Whats the
standard measurement of length", you will get "Meters" 99% of the time.
At one time it was common to call it the "English" system of
measurement, but that became confusing when the UK dropped it.

And now that the rest of the world has dropped it, it causes confusion when the
term is used in an international medium.

And even being American, I still believe that Americans - for the most part -
are obnoxiously ignorant of what goes on outside the borders of this country.
"Thats not how we do it, so it must be wrong".
--
Randy

[Lee]

Fabian said:

Lee hu kiteb:

The point is to demonstrate that "standard" is a correct way
to refer to the "English" measurement system in US English,
and is not, as the previous poster suggested, meant to suggest
that it is the international standard system of measurement.

Unless you are writing for a specific national audience, it is bad style
to use words for a specific meaning that is used only in that country.

No it isn't, if the meaning is clear in context.

Nonsense. Any English-speaker who can't figure out what
"standard" means when contrasted with "metric" shouldn't
be trying to use a keyboard without supervision.

I do believe there are many people on the Internet, including this
particular newsgroup, whose first language is NOT English.

Of course. But if their vocabularly includes words like "inch",
"mile", and "gallon", it should not be confusing to them to find
"standard" contrasted with "metric".

I refuse to believe that anybody who responded to the OP was
confused by the meaning. They were simply looking for a
chance to tweak an American nose.

In my country, "standard" (yes, its even an English-speaking country!
English is an official language!) refers to units such as the xiber and
the pulzier. Are these maybe what you had in mind?

I would hope that in your English-speaking country, it is normal
to consider the context when interpretting a word.

[Lee]

HikksNotAtHome said:

In article <bn********@drn.newsguy.com>, Lee <RE**************@cox.net> writes:

As "they" was me, you could have seen my jokingly staged confusion was
followed by a correct help link, more to the OP's point but forgotten in
the follow up.

No, actually, I don't think I ever read your original response,
and wouldn't have objected to some good-natured teasing about it.
My objection is to the characterization of the use of the term
"standard" as:

"... indicative of a lack of understanding of the fact that
the web is world wide, ..."

Which would make me the "they". And if I weren't American, I probably wouldn't
find this whole conversation hilariously funny.

I don't see the humor. Apparently you are bigotted against
your own people. That happens.

when, in fact, the term "standard" in this case has become an
idiomatic name for the measurement system, which has lost most
of the original meaning of being used universally.

And if you go to just about any non-American country and ask "Whats the
standard measurement of length", you will get "Meters" 99% of the time.

Of course. Why don't you see that that is not relevant?

At one time it was common to call it the "English" system of
measurement, but that became confusing when the UK dropped it.

And now that the rest of the world has dropped it, it causes confusion when the
term is used in an international medium.

Not when used in the context of "standard" vs "metric".

[Lee]

Pat Norton said:

Lee wrote:

Even that lack of understanding inside the U.S. has

led to a multimillion dollar crash on Mars.

That crash was caused by the complete failure to
specify the measurement system, not by
misunderstanding "standard" vs "metric".

The specification mandated metric units. The subcontractor, Lockheed
Martin, failed use metric units.

Ok, thanks.
I heard wrong or mis-remembered. The point stands that it was
not confusing of the terms "standard" vs "metric".

[Dr John Stockton]

JRS: In article <3f**********************@news.optusnet.com.au>, seen
in news:comp.lang.javascript, RIck Measham <ri***@spam-site.net.au>
posted at Wed, 29 Oct 2003 06:50:21 :-

piaseckiac wrote:

I am producing a website on air and need a link to change the entire
website from standard to metric for temperature, pressure,
miles-kilometers, and volume. Thank you.

If you're just looking for a way to convert static imperial values to static
metric values, then Google is your friend.

Provided that one remembers that the units used in America, which they
tend to call English units, are not necessarily the same size as the
units of the same name which have in the past been used in England, the
rest of the UK, and in the Dominions and the other Colonies.

The only safe name for the quaint units still used in America is
probably "American units"; that way, the Rest of the World will realise
that they (tRotW) cannot be sure what the Americans are talking about.

In the above, I disregard Canada, since others can never be sure how
much they are American and how much they are French; and also any other
odd countries still using antiquated units (which are they?).

--
© John Stockton, Surrey, UK. ?@merlyn.demon.co.uk / ??*********@physics.org ©
Web <URL:http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/> - FAQish topics, acronyms, & links.
Correct <= 4-line sig. separator as above, a line precisely "-- " (SoRFC1036)
Do not Mail News to me. Before a reply, quote with ">" or "> " (SoRFC1036)

[Fabian]

Lee hu kiteb:

Fabian said:

Lee hu kiteb:

Unless you are writing for a specific national audience, it is bad
style to use words for a specific meaning that is used only in that
country.

No it isn't, if the meaning is clear in context.

Read again - the OP gave no context.

Nonsense. Any English-speaker who can't figure out what
"standard" means when contrasted with "metric" shouldn't
be trying to use a keyboard without supervision.

I do believe there are many people on the Internet, including this
particular newsgroup, whose first language is NOT English.

Of course. But if their vocabularly includes words like "inch",
"mile", and "gallon", it should not be confusing to them to find
"standard" contrasted with "metric".

It would if standard had a specific meaning in that person's country
which had a different specific meaning in the country of the OP.

In my country, "standard" (yes, its even an English-speaking country!
English is an official language!) refers to units such as the xiber
and the pulzier. Are these maybe what you had in mind?

I would hope that in your English-speaking country, it is normal
to consider the context when interpretting a word.

Let's see, the OP wanted a "standard to metric" converter. No mention of
country was involved. Given teh context, any person from my country
would assume standard *was* referring to the xiber et alii.

[Fabian]

Dr John Stockton hu kiteb:

In the above, I disregard Canada, since others can never be sure how
much they are American and how much they are French; and also any
other odd countries still using antiquated units (which are they?).

I maintain a list on my web page. I don't keep track of their current
usage, merely their existence.

fwiw, furlongs are in current usage in the British train industry, and
Japanese house floor area is currently measured in jou (tatami mats).
--
--
Fabian
Visit my website often and for long periods!
http://www.lajzar.co.uk

[John G Harris]

In article <20***************************@mb-m19.aol.com>,
HikksNotAtHome <hi************@aol.com> writes
<snip>

And if you go to just about any non-American country and ask "Whats the
standard measurement of length", you will get "Meters" 99% of the time.

<snip> ^^^^^^

Unlikely : "metres" hasn't got a capital letter and most countries spell
it the ISO way :-)

John
--
John Harris

[John G Harris]

In article <4x**************@merlyn.demon.co.uk>, Dr John Stockton
<sp**@merlyn.demon.co.uk> writes
<snip>

Provided that one remembers that the units used in America, which they
tend to call English units, are not necessarily the same size as the
units of the same name which have in the past been used in England, the
rest of the UK, and in the Dominions and the other Colonies.

<snip>

It's worse than that. When the USA changed the definition of the yard so
that 1 inch = 2.54 cm exactly, US industry changed but the US Survey
didn't change (or couldn't afford to). There are now two official US
miles : the 'survey mile' and the 'international mile'.

John
--
John Harris

[Lee]

Fabian said:

Lee hu kiteb:

Fabian said:

Lee hu kiteb: Unless you are writing for a specific national audience, it is bad
style to use words for a specific meaning that is used only in that
country.

No it isn't, if the meaning is clear in context.

Read again - the OP gave no context.

Yes he did. He said he was converting from standard to metric.
That's all the context any English-speaker should require.

Nonsense. Any English-speaker who can't figure out what
"standard" means when contrasted with "metric" shouldn't
be trying to use a keyboard without supervision.

I do believe there are many people on the Internet, including this
particular newsgroup, whose first language is NOT English.

Of course. But if their vocabularly includes words like "inch",
"mile", and "gallon", it should not be confusing to them to find
"standard" contrasted with "metric".

It would if standard had a specific meaning in that person's country
which had a different specific meaning in the country of the OP.

There's no avoiding that possibility. It is very rare, and the people
in that other country are more likely to know that their use collides
with the US usage than the other way around.

In my country, "standard" (yes, its even an English-speaking country!
English is an official language!) refers to units such as the xiber
and the pulzier. Are these maybe what you had in mind?

I would hope that in your English-speaking country, it is normal
to consider the context when interpretting a word.

Let's see, the OP wanted a "standard to metric" converter. No mention of
country was involved. Given teh context, any person from my country
would assume standard *was* referring to the xiber et alii.

Really? Were you confused into thinking that, even for a moment,
or do you bring some common sense into play in understanding what
people mean when the terminology isn't completely precise?

[Fabian]

John G Harris hu kiteb:

In article <4x**************@merlyn.demon.co.uk>, Dr John Stockton
<sp**@merlyn.demon.co.uk> writes
<snip>

Provided that one remembers that the units used in America, which
they tend to call English units, are not necessarily the same size
as the units of the same name which have in the past been used in
England, the rest of the UK, and in the Dominions and the other
Colonies.

<snip>

It's worse than that. When the USA changed the definition of the yard
so that 1 inch = 2.54 cm exactly, US industry changed but the US
Survey didn't change (or couldn't afford to). There are now two
official US miles : the 'survey mile' and the 'international mile'.

You forgot the nautical mile, officially equal to exactly 1852 metres.

And then there is the *standard* nautical mile, which is 1852 *meters*.

If you (in general, not specifically) think I am making fun of you, you
are probably well deserving of being made fun of on this point. If you
decide to believe I am not making fun of you, then no harm whatsoever
has been done.

--
--
Fabian
Visit my website often and for long periods!
http://www.lajzar.co.uk

[Fabian]

Lee hu kiteb:

Fabian said:

Read again - the OP gave no context.

Yes he did. He said he was converting from standard to metric.
That's all the context any English-speaker should require.

There are many English speakers who consider standard to be equal to
metric. There are many English speakers who learned English as a foreign
language, and for them, standard may well refer to something that
neither of us has ever heard of.

Suppose I asked for a script to convert standard floor areas to metric.
Do you assume standard is square yards? I happen to be in Japan right
now, so I would in fact be referring to jou, not square yards. There was
no context given, so you can't make a useful assumption.

Of course. But if their vocabularly includes words like "inch",
"mile", and "gallon", it should not be confusing to them to find
"standard" contrasted with "metric".

It would if standard had a specific meaning in that person's country
which had a different specific meaning in the country of the OP.

There's no avoiding that possibility. It is very rare, and the people
in that other country are more likely to know that their use collides
with the US usage than the other way around.

You obviously have no idea how unimportant the USA is considered in my
country :) The USA rarely makes news in the national press, except when
it interfers in the affairs of a nearby country, and then only as a
byline to that country being interfered with. Most people in my country
have no idea what units the USA uses.

Let's see, the OP wanted a "standard to metric" converter. No
mention of country was involved. Given teh context, any person from
my country would assume standard *was* referring to the xiber et
alii.

Really? Were you confused into thinking that, even for a moment,
or do you bring some common sense into play in understanding what
people mean when the terminology isn't completely precise?

Well, I didn't think he was referring to my particular country's
definition of standard. I assumed he was referring to his own country's
definition of standard. Given that there was no hint as to which country
he meant, I had no idea whatsoever what he meant by standard.
--
--
Fabian
Visit my website often and for long periods!
http://www.lajzar.co.uk

[Lasse Reichstein Nielsen]

Lee <RE**************@cox.net> writes:

Yes he did. He said he was converting from standard to metric.
That's all the context any English-speaker should require.

It is enough that I can guess that "standard" is some local standard
for measurement from where he comes from, and that I don't know enough
about it to help him. I guess that is sufficient.

I am not certain I haven't heard the term used about US measurements
before, but I guessed that the author was from the US *because* he
didn't say.

/L
--
Lasse Reichstein Nielsen - lr*@hotpop.com
DHTML Death Colors: <URL:http://www.infimum.dk/HTML/rasterTriangleDOM.html>
'Faith without judgement merely degrades the spirit divine.'

[Dr John Stockton]

JRS: In article <bn*********@drn.newsguy.com>, seen in
news:comp.lang.javascript, Lee <RE**************@cox.net> posted at Wed,
29 Oct 2003 06:44:36 :-

Pat Norton said:

Lee wrote:

Even that lack of understanding inside the U.S. has
led to a multimillion dollar crash on Mars.

That crash was caused by the complete failure to
specify the measurement system, not by
misunderstanding "standard" vs "metric".

The specification mandated metric units. The subcontractor, Lockheed
Martin, failed use metric units.

Ok, thanks.
I heard wrong or mis-remembered. The point stands that it was
not confusing of the terms "standard" vs "metric".

There were, it seems, two stupidities involved.

One was doing technical work in archaic units.

The other was transferring the numbers of the data without checking the
units of the data.

Without the first, the second might well not have mattered, though there
can still be confusion between, say, hectoPascals and megaPascals.

--
© John Stockton, Surrey, UK. ?@merlyn.demon.co.uk / ??*********@physics.org ©
Web <URL:http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/> - FAQish topics, acronyms, & links.
Correct <= 4-line sig. separator as above, a line precisely "-- " (SoRFC1036)
Do not Mail News to me. Before a reply, quote with ">" or "> " (SoRFC1036)

[Lee]

Fabian said:

Lee hu kiteb:

Fabian said:

Read again - the OP gave no context.

Yes he did. He said he was converting from standard to metric.
That's all the context any English-speaker should require.

There are many English speakers who consider standard to be equal to
metric. There are many English speakers who learned English as a foreign
language, and for them, standard may well refer to something that
neither of us has ever heard of.

Suppose I asked for a script to convert standard floor areas to metric.
Do you assume standard is square yards? I happen to be in Japan right
now, so I would in fact be referring to jou, not square yards. There was
no context given, so you can't make a useful assumption.

That's not really comparable to the OP. Nobody (except possibly you)
has disputed that his meaning was immediately obvious.

There's no avoiding that possibility. It is very rare, and the people
in that other country are more likely to know that their use collides
with the US usage than the other way around.

You obviously have no idea how unimportant the USA is considered in my
country :) The USA rarely makes news in the national press, except when
it interfers in the affairs of a nearby country, and then only as a
byline to that country being interfered with. Most people in my country
have no idea what units the USA uses.

I would expect that those few who read this newsgroup understand that
their obscure measurement system is virtually unheard of in the rest
of the world (unlike the US system) and so would have enough common
sense to realize that "standard" didn't refer to it.

Let's see, the OP wanted a "standard to metric" converter. No
mention of country was involved. Given teh context, any person from
my country would assume standard *was* referring to the xiber et
alii.

Really? Were you confused into thinking that, even for a moment,
or do you bring some common sense into play in understanding what
people mean when the terminology isn't completely precise?

Well, I didn't think he was referring to my particular country's
definition of standard. I assumed he was referring to his own country's
definition of standard. Given that there was no hint as to which country
he meant, I had no idea whatsoever what he meant by standard.

I can understand you saying that you couldn't be more than 99.99%
sure, but I find it difficult to believe that you had no idea.

[Lee]

Dr John Stockton said:

JRS: In article <3f**********************@news.optusnet.com.au>, seen
in news:comp.lang.javascript, RIck Measham <ri***@spam-site.net.au>
posted at Wed, 29 Oct 2003 06:50:21 :-

piaseckiac wrote:

I am producing a website on air and need a link to change the entire
website from standard to metric for temperature, pressure,
miles-kilometers, and volume. Thank you.

If you're just looking for a way to convert static imperial values to static
metric values, then Google is your friend.

Provided that one remembers that the units used in America, which they
tend to call English units, are not necessarily the same size as the
units of the same name which have in the past been used in England, the
rest of the UK, and in the Dominions and the other Colonies.

Actually, if I Google "standard to metric", the very first hit
is a page titled "US Standard to Metric Measurement Conversions",
so it seems that Google is a friend, after all.

I don't believe that anybody outside the US can be as disgusted
with the US system as those of us who are stuck with it, and who
still hear idiotic reasons why we should continue to use it.

Back when it was on track to being accepted, schools concentrated
too much on teaching conversion factors, instead of showing the
simplicity of a decimal system. As a result, far too many people
think of the metric system is more complicated, because you keep
having to divide or multiply by 2.54 or 454, etc.

Meanwhile, I'm stuck with directions that say to add 6 ounces of
concentrate to one gallon of water, and a container that only
holds a pint and a half.

[rf]

"Lee" <RE**************@cox.net> wrote in message
news:bn*********@drn.newsguy.com...

Evertjan. said:

Lee wrote on 28 okt 2003 in comp.lang.javascript: But it is. It is an affront to the cyberworld to take it for granted that
the readers of a posing know, even without specific warning, that the OP
includes American, no U.S. specific meaning to a keyword.
Nonsense. Any English-speaker who can't figure out what
"standard" means when contrasted with "metric" shouldn't
be trying to use a keyboard without supervision.

I speak English, well Australian English, and I have never ever heard until
now of a "standard" measuring system.

Here we have Metric (the legally inforced "standard" for Australia) and
Imperial (inches and those other confusing things). We do not have
"standard".
I refuse to believe that anybody who responded to the OP was
confused by the meaning.

I was confused by the OP's words, untill I realised that the OP is probably
from the United States of America and so naturally assumes that anything
that the US of A uses is "standard". I then accepted the OP's uses of the
word "standard" as yet another one of those americanisms that I have to
remember, in this case "standard" means Imperial.

Cheers
Richard.

[Lee]

Lasse Reichstein Nielsen said:

Lee <RE**************@cox.net> writes:

Yes he did. He said he was converting from standard to metric.
That's all the context any English-speaker should require.

It is enough that I can guess that "standard" is some local standard
for measurement from where he comes from, and that I don't know enough
about it to help him. I guess that is sufficient.

I am not certain I haven't heard the term used about US measurements
before, but I guessed that the author was from the US *because* he
didn't say.

He is speaking English and is asking to convert from some form
of measurement that he seems to think that people will know about
into metric. If you are at all aware of inches, feet, pounds,
etc, it shouldn't take a lot of deep thought to figure it out.

[Fabian]

Lee hu kiteb:

He is speaking English and is asking to convert from some form
of measurement that he seems to think that people will know about
into metric. If you are at all aware of inches, feet, pounds,
etc, it shouldn't take a lot of deep thought to figure it out.

It is this kind of parochialism that makes the world contemptuous of
America. Why should we assume that failure to give useful information
means we should assume the data implied is American? It doesn't make
sense as a valid assumption for about 96% of the world's population. By
imposing this assumption, you are making it one rule for America and
another rule for the rest of the world.
--
--
Fabian
Visit my website often and for long periods!
http://www.lajzar.co.uk

[Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn]

Fabian wrote:

Lee hu kiteb:

He is speaking English and is asking to convert from some form
of measurement that he seems to think that people will know about
into metric. If you are at all aware of inches, feet, pounds,
etc, it shouldn't take a lot of deep thought to figure it out.

It is this kind of parochialism that makes the world contemptuous of
America.

^^^^^^^
You talk about the continent, don't you?
PointedEars

P.S.
You don't use Japanese glyphs in your postings,
why are you declaring `ISO-2022-jp' for charset?

[Albert Wagner]

On Thu, 30 Oct 2003 17:17:15 +0900
"Fabian" <la****@hotmail.com> wrote:
<snip>

It is this kind of parochialism that makes the world contemptuous of
America. Why should we assume that failure to give useful information
means we should assume the data implied is American? It doesn't make
sense as a valid assumption for about 96% of the world's population.
By imposing this assumption, you are making it one rule for America
and another rule for the rest of the world.

Converting from something called "standard" to metric obviously means
converting from something non-metric to metric. Of course, "standard"
(non-metric) is ambiguous in an international context, but it is an
honest mistake by a single individual.

What is really interesting about this unusually long thread is that you
and others have seized upon this simple error as an opportunity to bash
the USA and make the claim that the whole world is "contemptuous of
America." Surely this contempt is based on something more important
than "parochialism." In the last half-century since the end of World
War II and the retreat of European colonialism, just what has the USA
done to deserve this contempt? In fifty more years do you suppose it
will be as forgotten as the parochialism of Europe that chopped up
Africa, the Middle East and South Asia?
--
Life is an offensive, directed against the repetitious mechanism of the
Universe.
--Alfred North Whitehead (1861-1947)

[Lee]

Fabian said:

Lee hu kiteb:

He is speaking English and is asking to convert from some form
of measurement that he seems to think that people will know about
into metric. If you are at all aware of inches, feet, pounds,
etc, it shouldn't take a lot of deep thought to figure it out.

It is this kind of parochialism that makes the world contemptuous of
America. Why should we assume that failure to give useful information
means we should assume the data implied is American? It doesn't make
sense as a valid assumption for about 96% of the world's population. By
imposing this assumption, you are making it one rule for America and
another rule for the rest of the world.

We must have a more extreme cultural difference than I thought.
I can't understand why I have to point out to you that the OP
wasn't addressing 96% of the world population, but the readers
of a technical English language newsgroup.

I can't understand why you continue to fail to comprehend that
the terminology wasn't confusing to many, if any, readers. He
received answers to his question without any need for further
clarification.

In your culture, should I apologize for the fact that my country
exerts so much influence that people are able to understand what
we say, even when we are not completely precise? Should we avoid
any vernacular, even if it is understood, because it might hurt
your national pride?

Earlier today, in another venue, some arrogant UKian mentioned
walking across a "zebra". Shall I chastise him for distressing
people of your ilk who might be concerned that the animal may
have been injured in the process?

[Dr John Stockton]

JRS: In article <d6**********@hotpop.com>, seen in
news:comp.lang.javascript, Lasse Reichstein Nielsen <lr*@hotpop.com>
posted at Thu, 30 Oct 2003 00:44:04 :-

I am not certain I haven't heard the term used about US measurements
before, but I guessed that the author was from the US *because* he
didn't say.

Note : in the more visible parts of your articles, you don't say where
you are from either.

Three classes of people don't say where they are from, in descending
order of size :

Most Americans;
Those who want or are willing to pass as Americans;
People like you, who could not be mistaken for Americans.

--
© John Stockton, Surrey, UK. ??*@merlyn.demon.co.uk Turnpike v4.00 MIME. ©
Web <URL:http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/> - w. FAQish topics, links, acronyms
Dates - miscdate.htm Year 2000 - date2000.htm Critical Dates - critdate.htm
Euro computing - eurocash.htm UK Y2k mini-FAQ: y2k_mfaq.txt Don't Mail News

[Dr John Stockton]

JRS: In article <bn*******@drn.newsguy.com>, seen in
news:comp.lang.javascript, Lee <RE**************@cox.net> posted at Wed,
29 Oct 2003 15:50:55 :-

Dr John Stockton said: Actually, if I Google "standard to metric", the very first hit
is a page titled "US Standard to Metric Measurement Conversions",
so it seems that Google is a friend, after all.
Since the American nation, collectively and individually, is so voluble,
both in speech and in print, very naturally a large proportion of what
is indexed by Google is of US origin. That means that Google, unless
very thoughtfully used, is not a guide to proper usage.
I don't believe that anybody outside the US can be as disgusted
with the US system as those of us who are stuck with it, and who
still hear idiotic reasons why we should continue to use it.

The US claims to be a Democracy, or at least a Republic. Its populace
should be open to rational argument, and the Administration,
Legislature, and Judiciary are, AIUI, responsible for implementing the
WillOfThePeople, in so far as it is rational to do so.

--
© John Stockton, Surrey, UK. ?@merlyn.demon.co.uk DOS 3.3, 6.20; Win98. ©
Web <URL:http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/> - FAQqish topics, acronyms & links.
PAS EXE TXT ZIP via <URL:http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/programs/00index.htm>
My DOS <URL:http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/batfiles.htm> - also batprogs.htm.

[Dr John Stockton]

JRS: In article <bn*********@drn.newsguy.com>, seen in
news:comp.lang.javascript, Lee <RE**************@cox.net> posted at Wed,
29 Oct 2003 13:05:46 :-

Fabian said:

Lee hu kiteb:

Fabian said:

Lee hu kiteb:

Unless you are writing for a specific national audience, it is bad
style to use words for a specific meaning that is used only in that
country.

No it isn't, if the meaning is clear in context.

Read again - the OP gave no context.

Yes he did. He said he was converting from standard to metric.
That's all the context any English-speaker should require.

There is, in the USA, a naive belief that the language that is spoken
there is English (when not Hispanic, Ebonic, ...). This is wrong. It
is most generously described as American English.

There are probably more people in the EU who can read English adequately
than there are in the USA (it is reading that matters here); then you
must add all those Australians, New Zealanders, educated Indians,
Ghanaians, Nigerians, etc., etc.
There's no avoiding that possibility. It is very rare, and the people
in that other country are more likely to know that their use collides
with the US usage than the other way around.

That is of course true, since the Americans are notoriously pig-headed
in international affairs. I have just read, in my newspaper, of a group
of Americans who wanted to entertain an Iraqi to a generous lunch. So
far so good. But (a) it was in Ramadan, a time for dawn-to-dusk fast;
and (b) the menu included ham sandwiches. They don't even have the wit
to understand those who they invade.

That attitude, on the part of the US, is not acceptable to those
elsewhere.

--
© John Stockton, Surrey, UK. ?@merlyn.demon.co.uk Turnpike v4.00 IE 4 ©
<URL:http://jibbering.com/faq/> Jim Ley's FAQ for news:comp.lang.javascript
<URL:http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/js-index.htm> JS maths, dates, sources.
<URL:http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/> TP/BP/Delphi/JS/&c., FAQ topics, links.

[Pat Norton]

Albert Wagner wrote:

Converting from something called "standard" to metric obviously
means converting from something non-metric to metric. Of course,
"standard" (non-metric) is ambiguous in an international context

There are two issues that I see.
1. The lexical (naming) issue.
Britain and some other countries have the unambiguous name 'imperial'.
Unfortunately, there is no equivalent name for US units. I have seen:
'Standard'
'inch-pound system'
'English'
'American'
'US customary'
'Non-metric'

2. The semantic issue.
Words are not arbitrary labels. They are loaded with meaning. All
transmissions need compatibility between transmitter (speaker) and
receiver (listener).

Taking each name in the list in turn....
We have already seen that the term 'standard', innocently used, may
not communicate the message intended. It is already ambiguous in some
critical US domains. The standard unit of distance for US soldiers is
the meter. The standard units for medicines are metric. The standard
measure for wine and liquor in the US is the liter. The standard unit
of temperature in US aviation is the degree Celsius.

The term 'inch-pound' sounds like a unit of torque.

If America and Britain agreed that from tomorrow, both countries would
sell beer in 'English units', would that be the 473ml pint as used in
the US or the 568ml pint as used in England? If they both agreed that
they would refuel cars in 'English' units, would that be the US gallon
(used in the US) or the litre (used for fuel in England)?

I have no semantic argument against the last three in the above list
of names.

[Lee]

Dr John Stockton said:

JRS: In article <bn*********@drn.newsguy.com>, seen in
news:comp.lang.javascript, Lee <RE**************@cox.net> posted at Wed,
29 Oct 2003 13:05:46 :-

Fabian said:

Lee hu kiteb:

Fabian said:
>
> Lee hu kiteb:

> Unless you are writing for a specific national audience, it is bad
> style to use words for a specific meaning that is used only in that
> country.

No it isn't, if the meaning is clear in context.

Read again - the OP gave no context.

Yes he did. He said he was converting from standard to metric.
That's all the context any English-speaker should require.

There is, in the USA, a naive belief that the language that is spoken
there is English (when not Hispanic, Ebonic, ...). This is wrong. It
is most generously described as American English.

There are probably more people in the EU who can read English adequately
than there are in the USA (it is reading that matters here); then you
must add all those Australians, New Zealanders, educated Indians,
Ghanaians, Nigerians, etc., etc.

It's not clear what point you're trying to make, other than to
expose your ignorance and bigotry.

There's no avoiding that possibility. It is very rare, and the people
in that other country are more likely to know that their use collides
with the US usage than the other way around.

That is of course true, since the Americans are notoriously pig-headed
in international affairs. I have just read, in my newspaper, of a group
of Americans who wanted to entertain an Iraqi to a generous lunch. So
far so good. But (a) it was in Ramadan, a time for dawn-to-dusk fast;
and (b) the menu included ham sandwiches. They don't even have the wit
to understand those who they invade.

That attitude, on the part of the US, is not acceptable to those
elsewhere.

Another attitude that is frowned upon in some places is to
characterize the actions of a group of people as showing the
attitude of their nation.

It seems more likely to me that somebody made up a nice bash
than that anybody in Iraq could possibly overlook the fact that
it's Ramadan. Do you have a citation for the article?

[Lee]

Dr John Stockton said:

JRS: In article <bn*******@drn.newsguy.com>, seen in
news:comp.lang.javascript, Lee <RE**************@cox.net> posted at Wed,
29 Oct 2003 15:50:55 :-

Dr John Stockton said:

Actually, if I Google "standard to metric", the very first hit
is a page titled "US Standard to Metric Measurement Conversions",
so it seems that Google is a friend, after all.

Since the American nation, collectively and individually, is so voluble,
both in speech and in print, very naturally a large proportion of what
is indexed by Google is of US origin. That means that Google, unless
very thoughtfully used, is not a guide to proper usage.

Nobody offered it as such. The point in question was whether or
not Google would be a good source for the OP.

I don't believe that anybody outside the US can be as disgusted
with the US system as those of us who are stuck with it, and who
still hear idiotic reasons why we should continue to use it.

The US claims to be a Democracy, or at least a Republic. Its populace
should be open to rational argument, and the Administration,
Legislature, and Judiciary are, AIUI, responsible for implementing the
WillOfThePeople, in so far as it is rational to do so.

I'm not aware of any large body of people that can be trusted
to follow rational argument rather than emotional appeal or
what they already "know" to be true. You're certainly not a
good candidate to suggest that your people are any different.

[John G Harris]

In article <20******************************@tcac.net>, Albert Wagner
<al******@tcac.net> writes
<snip>

In the last half-century since the end of World
War II and the retreat of European colonialism, just what has the USA
done to deserve this contempt?

<snip>

Posted job adverts in comp.lang.javascript without the acronym USA
appearing anywhere in the article :-(

John
--
John Harris

[Richard Cornford]

"John G Harris" <jo**@nospam.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:2B**************@jgharris.demon.co.uk...

<snip>

..., just what
has the USA done to deserve this contempt?

<snip>

Posted job adverts in comp.lang.javascript without the
acronym USA appearing anywhere in the article :-(

The United States of America posted a job advert in
comp.lang.javascript? Did it leave an email address? ;-)

Richard.

[Fabian]

Albert Wagner hu kiteb:

... In the last
half-century since the end of World War II and the retreat of
European colonialism, just what has the USA done to deserve this
contempt?
Um, is this a rhetorical question? Or do you genuinely have no idea?
...In fifty more years do you suppose it will be as forgotten
as the parochialism of Europe that chopped up Africa, the Middle East
and South Asia?

I doubt it. That hasn't been forgotten either by the descendants of
those involved.

--
--
Fabian
Visit my website often and for long periods!
http://www.lajzar.co.uk

[Albert Wagner]

On Thu, 30 Oct 2003 17:51:43 +0000
Dr John Stockton <sp**@merlyn.demon.co.uk> wrote:
<snip>

There is, in the USA, a naive belief that the language that is spoken
there is English <snip> There are probably more people in the EU who can read English
adequately than there are in the USA <snip> That is of course true, since the Americans are notoriously pig-headed
in international affairs.

<snip>

I just did a scan of your most recent posts to this newsgroup and the
quoted text above is typical. At this point, I think that it is quite
clear to all what you think of the USA and it's citizens. I was tempted
to bite on this flame bait. I was also curious as to why you decided to
spew such vitriol in a technical language newsgroup. But rather, I
think that I'll be quite content for you just to confine further remarks
to javascript.

--
Life is an offensive, directed against the repetitious mechanism of the
Universe.
--Alfred North Whitehead (1861-1947)

[Lasse Reichstein Nielsen]

Albert Wagner <al******@tcac.net> writes:

I just did a scan of your most recent posts to this newsgroup and the
quoted text above is typical.

All other things aside, I belive the statement:

There are probably more people in the EU who can read English
adequately than there are in the USA

to be true, and I see no reason to read it as critique of the US.
It might be wrong, but I think it is *probably* true.

Obviously many of us in the EU will only just speak English
adequately, and some not at all, but the population of the EU is 150%
of the population of the US, and all countries in the EU teach English
in school.

/L
--
Lasse Reichstein Nielsen - lr*@hotpop.com
DHTML Death Colors: <URL:http://www.infimum.dk/HTML/rasterTriangleDOM.html>
'Faith without judgement merely degrades the spirit divine.'

[Albert Wagner]

On 31 Oct 2003 02:26:28 +0100
Lasse Reichstein Nielsen <lr*@hotpop.com> wrote:
<snip>

All other things aside, I belive the statement:

There are probably more people in the EU who can read English
adequately than there are in the USA

to be true, and I see no reason to read it as critique of the US.
It might be wrong, but I think it is *probably* true.

Obviously many of us in the EU will only just speak English
adequately, and some not at all, but the population of the EU is 150%
of the population of the US, and all countries in the EU teach English
in school.

Possibly, but not likely, in that except for the UK, English is a second
language for members of the EU. Furthermore, if the honorable Dr John
is free to make his judgements based on Usenet posts by USA citizens
then, in like manner, I am free to judge the English proficiency of EU
members. At any rate my post does not depend on that one contested
statement; The dear Dr's dislike for anything American is clearly
visible and his remarks are definitely offensive. To quote the good Dr:
"It is not a question of understanding, but of good manners."

--
Life is an offensive, directed against the repetitious mechanism of the
Universe.
--Alfred North Whitehead (1861-1947)