CSS | | Exact Size | Exact Size
Unit | Name | (Inches) | (Millimeters)
--------------------------------------------------------
cm | Centimeter | 50/127 | 10
mm | Millimeter | 5/127 | 1
Q | Quarter-millimeter | 5/508 | 1/4
in | Inch | 1 | 127/5
pc | Pica | 1/6 | 127/30
pt | Point | 1/72 | 127/360
px | Pixel | 1/96 | 127/480
Digging deeper, the kyu -- or Q for quarter millimeter -- is apparently a foundational distance measurement in Japanese typesetting, which is metric and operates on a millimeter grid.
You need to start using SI points that are defined using wavelengths of ground state emissions of a decaying Americium atom.
https://startbigthinksmall.wordpress.com/2010/01/04/points-i...
Mapping story points to time doesn't really work for individual cases because of those different experience levels, it's going to heavily depend on who does the case. Instead, you track story points competed in total for the team for the entire sprint - the different experience levels average out into something consistent, like 30-35 story points per sprint.
"Velocity" is related scrum terminology, and is the mapping of that whole-team measure back to time. A previous team that understood how this worked and stuck to it had those story points per two-week sprints, so we could estimate things months out with reasonable accuracy despite the different skill levels.
I also thought this post was going to be about story points because it's a common complaint from people who don't understand the "different experience levels" part. If everyone on the team reliably took the same amount of time for a given case, then yeah, you could cut it out and just estimate in time. But it's not for that.
Instead metric system is predictable and easy to work with.
Real question is why US just don't move to metric system?
To me asking why we don't have a single measuring standard is similiar to asking why we don't all agree on a single language. Sometimes it would be easier, sometimes it wouldn't, but in the end it doesn't matter all that much.
"Going metric" raises the question of whether we adopt metric measures for our existing standards (such as pipe threads) or actually adopt the ISO sizes. The latter would cause a brief but massive inventory management problem, that nobody's ever willing to put up with, even if there's a long term benefit.
I believe we made a mistake in how we tried to teach the metric system. I learned in first grade: Metric is easy because it's just math. Most people heard "math" and freaked out. Metric was taught as a bunch of conversions and units. Inches were taught as: Here's a ruler, go measure some things.
I remember talking to a machinist, and he said: "I hate the metric system because there's so much math." That was 30+ years ago. Today, machinists just read mm or inches from the same digital readout or CAD program.
My Canadian friends learned metric as: Here's a ruler, go measure some things.
The real advantage of metric is that you only have to do math once to calculate something. A cc is a ml is a gram. A liter is a cubic decimeter is a kg. It's just easy. A deep lake over a few square km? O(1) GT. Understanding orders of magnitude is a useful trait in a democracy.
You hit the nail on the head here though:
> My Canadian friends learned metric as: Here's a ruler, go measure some things.
Like any language, as long as you're translating you're loosing. Post signs in km and report temperature as C and everyone will understand it in less than a decade. A few years after I had a metric thermometer in my car C seemed easy.
It's not like the US failed to think of this. In the 80s they were posting signs in km. But back then there was a real economic cost to conversion for factories and machines. Now that's mostly gone, what remains is cultural resistance.
You adopt ISO sizes FFS. They are international standards. You really want to invent a whole new set of incompatible 'standards'?
You think the US is the first to go through this? Australia, Canada, and the UK went metric in the 1970s (we also decimalised our currencies). Yes it was challenging for some adults but mostly pretty easy for kids. People adapted. Industries adapted. Now we hardly think about it except when dealing with Americans or in some historical contexts.
Pretty common to talk about measurements of 1/2, 1/4, 1/8, 1/16 of an inch and find those graduated on a ruler. Or 1/2, 1/3, 1/4, 1/8 of a cup for liquid measures, etc.
But then machinists generally work in thousandth or ten-thousandths of an inch.
And most of the kitchen stuff is a chicken-and-egg problem: the US used 1/2 cup because that's what it is used to, the rest of the world has recipes calling for 50g of flour. If the US was used to weight-based measurements everyone would have a kitchen scale with 0.1g precision lying around, instead of a bunch of measuring cups.
Everything is standardized on IEEE floating point. ;-)
It's a headache to maintain collections of parts and tools such as taps and dies for both standards.
The biggest shift is simply the obsolescence of old stuff, and emergence of new stuff. And industries have adopted the practice of reducing the overall variety of parts needed. I work in the development of industrial measurement equipment, and where a design might once have had 30 different sizes of fasteners, now it's 5, all metric. Designs rarely need nuts and spacers any more. Washers are integrated into the screws. No more "philips" or flat head screws. And so forth.
The metric system is poorly suited for font sizes. Most designs require a series of sizes within a small range: a typical book or poster might use 9pt for footnotes, 12pt for main text, 16pt for subtitles, and 24pt for titles.
Aesthetically speaking the most attractive ratios of sizes are small ratios like 3:2 and 4:3. Using points it is very easy to construct an attractive range of font sizes like my example above. It is difficult to imagine how this would look in a metric system that's not a mess.
Shouldn't the real smarties be using 10-hour days using metric time? 100 minutes per hour, 100 seconds per minute.
If Europeans are so smart, why didn't they commit to metric time which is soon much easier to understand?
The maga people are ready to die on this hill.
Because we live in a land of liberty!
They've been trying for a long time, but apparently it's not an easy task.
You can read more here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metrication_in_the_United_Stat...
So, how and when did points come into play? ...
Well, ok. I stop procrastinating for now (i hope). I hate my brain.
The mention of
is kind of interesting --- hadn't heard of it before --- may need to revisit the "ProportionBar" tool which I made ages ago....
The distinction ends up being important if you need compatibility with some document format, or with common typesetting expectations. But if there weren't a concern of surprising people with certain expectations of font-picking widgets, I'd argue that the better choice would be millimeters.
4mm is a great default font size, and going up by one integer mm at a time is a reasonable step size (it's just under 3pt).
So disappointed that this document, as much as it obsesses over obscure physical quantities no one cares about, makes no mention of THE FUCK.
1 fuck is equal to the amount of concern you have about something below which you cannot achieve without having no concern at all, as which giving "zero fucks" is defined. "Absolute zero fucks" would be the formal terminology.
For preliminary purposes, we can assume 1 fuck = 1 shit = 1 damn, but must account for the possible existence of a big-point-vs-printers-point style situation. Also they could be drastically different, like if 1 shit given about global warming would be equivalent to 299_792_458 fucks or something like that.
I have very little knowledge about the *real* machinations behind the standardization of measures (a tinfoil conspiracy kook would call it an Agenda 21, or 21 Agendas One, but I'm not going there), I want this to be discussed.