«

JRS: In article <>, seen in
news:comp.lang.javascript, Lee <> 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.

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

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

Dr John Stockton said:
>
>JRS: In article <>, seen in
>news:comp.lang.javascript, Lee <> 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?

"Dr John Stockton" <> wrote in message
news:e3oLRIOWMtn$...
<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.

JRS: In article <3f9ed665$0$2239$>, seen
in news:comp.lang.javascript, RIck Measham <>
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 / ??. ©
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)

HikksNotAtHome said:
>
>In article <>, Lee <> 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".

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.

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".

JRS: In article <>, seen in
news:comp.lang.javascript, Lee <> 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 / ??. ©
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)