<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<p><br>
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 29/1/24 06:30, Philip Barnes wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:0CEDE4A8-5B1A-4A5A-B2D8-58E24DDEA777@trigpoint.me.uk">
<div dir="auto">The legal definition of a foot is of course 0.348
m.<br>
<br>
"Since an international agreement in 1959, the foot is defined
as equal to exactly 0.3048 metres'.<br>
<br>
Phil (trigpoint)</div>
</blockquote>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>NPL has a nice history on length measurement <br>
</p>
<p><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://resource.npl.co.uk/docs/educate_explore/posters/bg_historyoflength_poster.pdf">http://resource.npl.co.uk/docs/educate_explore/posters/bg_historyoflength_poster.pdf</a></p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>Even in the USA the survey foot is depreciated. <br>
</p>
<p><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://amerisurv.com/2023/02/09/the-deprecation-of-the-us-survey-foot/">https://amerisurv.com/2023/02/09/the-deprecation-of-the-us-survey-foot/</a></p>
<p>Depreciation in the US may be 'complete', at least in government
circles, in 2025... <br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:0CEDE4A8-5B1A-4A5A-B2D8-58E24DDEA777@trigpoint.me.uk"><br>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="auto">On 28 January 2024 18:57:45 GMT, Minh Nguyen
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:minh@nguyen.cincinnati.oh.us"><minh@nguyen.cincinnati.oh.us></a> wrote:</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote"
style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
<pre class="k9mail"><div dir="auto">Vào lúc 04:08 2024-01-28, Greg Troxel đã viết:
</div><blockquote class="gmail_quote"
style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #729fcf; padding-left: 1ex;"><div
dir="auto">Minh Nguyen <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:minh@nguyen.cincinnati.oh.us"><minh@nguyen.cincinnati.oh.us></a> writes:
</div><blockquote class="gmail_quote"
style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #ad7fa8; padding-left: 1ex;"><div
dir="auto">Vào lúc 19:50 2024-01-27, Brian M. Sperlongano đã viết:
</div><blockquote class="gmail_quote"
style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #8ae234; padding-left: 1ex;"><div
dir="auto">Uh so I did the math, and unless I've got this wrong, the difference
between survey feet and international feet for tagging, let's say,
Mount Everest, is less than seven one-hundredths of an inch. So I'm
really not even sure why we're discussing it beyond the fact that
we're all nerds about this sort of thing.
</div></blockquote><div dir="auto">
You got me. :-) The actual proposal doesn't mention the foot's two
definitions at all, and so far I'm planning to keep it that way.
</div></blockquote><div dir="auto">
I think it's important to be definitionally correct, even if it doesn't
really matter. It's a slippery slope, and pretty soon \pi is 3.
</div></blockquote><div dir="auto">
Poor Indiana. ;-) The definition of the foot would apply to the ' and ft abbreviations in every context, not just the ele=* key, so I'd suggest considering it separately, probably without the formality of a vote. The main unit symbol listing has come together more informally over the years. [1]
Sooner or later, OpenHistoricalMap will have a lot of fun with this issue...
[1] <a href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Map_features/Units"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Map_features/Units</a>
</div></pre>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>