User talk:Fnagaton/Binary prefixes3
 | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
kiB jargon
Glad to help. When I come across “kiB” in Wikipedia, it reminds me of that know-it-all kid on the train in that 3D animation, The Polar Express. In my opinion, Wikipedia looks its best when authors follow what the professional editors do at Encyclopedia Britannica and World Book. My spell checker, which recognizes all sorts of arcane computer jargon, just flagged “kiB”.
The following tidbit may also be of assistance to you in your efforts to counter those whose arguments are too dependent upon proposals of standard bodies:
Wikipedia currently flouts the Mother of all Standard Bodies, the BIPM, with regard to the use of a certain unit of measure. According to the BIPM’s SI brochure: Subsection 5.3.3, Formatting the value of a quantity, a space is always used to separate the unit symbol from the numeric value. It is “23 °C”, not “23°C”. Notable exceptions are the unit symbols for degree, minute, and second for plane angle, °, ′, and ″ (e.g., a latitude of 47° 38′). However, according to 5.3.7 Stating values of dimensionless quantities, or quantities of dimension one, the exception does not apply to the “%” symbol; it states as follows: “When it [the percent symbol] is used, a space separates the number and the symbol %.” This practice has not been well adopted by writers throughout the English-speaking world and Wikipedia wisely established a policy that is contrary to the BIPM (here in Manual of Style) that effectively requires that authors flout the BIPM in order to conform to the way people are accustomed to using and seeing the percent symbol. It is “75%” and not “75 %”.
The fundamental objective at Wikipedia must be to clearly communicate technically oriented information to the intended audience with minimal confusion. Technical bodies like the IEEE and IUPAC make proposals all the time. Some are well embraced and rapidly adopted. Sometimes not.
Greg L (my talk) 22:19, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
- Thank you, extremely useful. My position on this subject has always been that articles should be consistent with the terms used in the real world. If one day the majority of the real world uses -bi prefixes then so be it, but it hasn't happened yet after ten years or so of being "a standard". ;) Fnagaton 08:14, 17 March 2008 (UTC)