NIST unit rules and conventions

[Sanjeev Gupta]

Paul,

Personally, I find 25kg, 50ppm, 3m, more readable; but that is neither here
nor there.

My concern is that the space between "25" and "kg" should be non-breaking.
Else, readability suffers badly.  How do you do this in asciidoc?

-- 
Sanjeev Gupta
+65 98551208     http://www.linkedin.com/in/ghane


On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 3:56 AM Paul Theodoropoulos via devel <
devel at ntpsec.org> wrote:

> NIST has a page of guidelines for formatting units in documents -
>
> https://physics.nist.gov/cuu/Units/checklist.html
>
> I am conforming unit presentation within the various documents I'm editing
> to use the guidelines, mostly #15:
>
> There is a space between the numerical value and unit symbol, even when
> the value is used in an adjectival sense, except in the case of superscript
> units for plane angle.
>
> proper:     a 25 kg sphere
>             an angle of 2° 3'  4"
>             If the spelled-out name of a unit is used, the normal rules of
> English apply: "a roll of 35-millimeter film."
>
> improper:   a 25-kg sphere
>             an angle of 2 ° 3 ' 4 "
>
> So for example, where there are instances of 50ppm, 8-ms, I'm updating
> them to 50 ppm, 8 ms.
>
> Uniformity of presentation seems like a desireable goal - are there any
> objections to following these particular guidelines?
>
> There's a handful of other conventions codified that may turn up needing
> conformance, which I'll also conform where I find them - where reasonable.
>
> --
> Paul Theodoropouloswww.anastrophe.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> devel mailing list
> devel at ntpsec.org
> http://lists.ntpsec.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ntpsec.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20180921/352489d6/attachment-0001.html>