Re: why bytes are Bs and not bs

Subject: Re: why bytes are Bs and not bs
From: Peter Brown <pbrown -at- MKS -dot- COM>
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 12:51:59 -0400

Matt Ion wrote:

> On Thu, 12 Jun 1997 10:40:53 -0400, Ridder, Fred wrote:
>
> >In other words, "ton"
> >is a terribly ambiguous unit of measurement unless the context
> >is absolutely clear.
>
> Didn't the metric ton used to be spelled "tonne"? When did this
> change? Seems to me a rather simple way of separating it from the
> riff-raff.
>
> Your friend and mine,
> Matt

Yup, a metric tonne is spelled tonne.

--
---------------------------------------------------------------
"Opinions? I've had a few. But then again, too few to mention."
Peter Brown, Technical Writer (pbrown -at- mks -dot- com)
Mortice Kern Systems Inc. (http://www.mks.com)

TECHWR-L (Technical Communication) List Information: To send a message
to 2500+ readers, e-mail to TECHWR-L -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU -dot- Send commands
to LISTSERV -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU (e.g. HELP or SIGNOFF TECHWR-L).
Search the archives at http://www.documentation.com/ or search and
browse the archives at http://listserv.okstate.edu/archives/techwr-l.html


Previous by Author: Re: why bytes are Bs and not bs
Next by Author: Re: Levity in the workplace
Previous by Thread: Re: why bytes are Bs and not bs
Next by Thread: Re: why bytes are Bs and not bs


What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:


Sponsored Ads