Subject: kHz
From: "Geoff Hart (by way of \"Eric J. Ray\" <ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com>)" <ght -at- MTL -dot- FERIC -dot- CA>
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1998 06:38:09 -0600

Dave Neufeld wondered <<Which is "more" correct: kHz or KHz?>>

No argument here. "kilo" uses lower-case k in every scientific style
guide I've ever seen, and capital K is wrong, not "less right".
That's part of the ISO standard for metric prefixes, by the way,
_not_ a personal opinion.

<<The MS Style Guide (copyright 1995, not the latest 3rd edition)
contradicts itself. Sun's Read Me First! says kHz in its list of
abbreviations (why is that such a long word? <g>).>>

Yes, there are industry-specific exceptions to a few of the rules,
but not this one. Sun is right. But if you're looking for correct
abbreviations for scientific units of measure, consult a science
style guide such as the Council of Biology Editors or American
Chemical Society guides, not a computer guide.
--Geoff Hart @8^{)}
geoff-h -at- mtl -dot- feric -dot- ca

When an idea is wanting, a word can always be found to take its place.--Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

From ??? -at- ??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000=

Previous by Author: XML information in print
Next by Author: Techwhirler in other languages?
Previous by Thread: Re: Has the Web advanced the written word? - NO!
Next by Thread: Re: kHz or KHz?

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

Sponsored Ads