Gerhard Fiedler wrote:
> Jinx wrote:
>
>   =

>> Then someone will come along and say "why can't they write
>> '680,000 ohms 1/4 watt 100VDC This Way Up' on it ?". =

>>     =

>
> And completely forgetting that "680,000 ohms" is way too ambiguous to be
> used in production. Where was this resistor manufactured? Was that in a
> country that uses a decimal comma (meaning 680 ohms to a precision of thr=
ee
> digits after the comma) or  in one that uses a decimal point and a comma =
to
> separate thousands (meaning 680 kiloohms; yes, if you want to stay in this
> game, you should become familiar with SI prefixes, even though they all
> could be replaced by potencies of ten)?
>
> BTW, you forgot to print the precision... :)
>
> And BTW, to lessen the confusions with decimal point, decimal comma and
> thousand separators, ISO (IIRC) suggests to use the apostrophe as thousand
> separator. Both points and commas then become interchangeable decimal
> separators. "680'000" seems to be less ambiguous than both "680,000" and
> "680.000". (Of course, that still doesn't help much when you only see
> either of the two :)
>
> Gerhard
>
>   =

Of course, if you used the SI unit, and it was printed 6800'000 on a =

1206, then Thom=E0s would worry that it was really a 0.0089 resistor =

because he read it upside-down..... actually, that could be a problem =

with the current scheme too ... how about 911, a 910Ohm resistor, or is =

that a 11M resistor....

Rolf
-- =

http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist