standard to metric converter program

[Fabian]

Lee hu kiteb:

Fabian said:

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

Read again - the OP gave no context.

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.

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).

 

[John G Harris]

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 G Harris]

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

 

[Lee]

Fabian said:

Lee hu kiteb:


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.

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.

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]

Lee hu kiteb:

Fabian said:

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.

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.

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]

John G Harris hu kiteb:

<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.

 

[Lee]

Fabian said:

Lee hu kiteb:



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.

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.

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.

 

[Lasse Reichstein Nielsen]

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

 

[Lee]

Dr John Stockton said:

JRS: In article <[email protected]>, seen



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]

Evertjan. said:

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:

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.

 

[Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn]

Lee hu kiteb:

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?

 

[Dr John Stockton]

JRS: In article <[email protected]>, seen in

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.

 

[Dr John Stockton]

JRS: In article <[email protected]>, seen in

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.

 

[Lee]

Fabian said:

Lee hu kiteb:


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 <[email protected]>, seen in

Fabian said:

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.

 

[Pat Norton]

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 <[email protected]>, seen in


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.

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?