Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 10:16:20 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 10:16:10 -0500 Received: from vega.digitel2002.hu ([213.163.0.181]:45186 "EHLO vega.digitel2002.hu") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 10:15:58 -0500 Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 16:15:51 +0100 From: =?iso-8859-2?B?R+Fib3IgTOlu4XJ0?= To: Mike Galbraith Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Configure.help editorial policy Message-ID: <20011227151551.GB13004@vega.digitel2002.hu> Reply-To: lgb@lgb.hu In-Reply-To: <20011224094211.A15930@zapff.research.canon.com.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-2 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.24i X-Operating-System: vega Linux 2.4.17 i686 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Dec 24, 2001 at 07:25:44AM +0100, Mike Galbraith wrote: > > Well, what we have is KB, which people _think_ they understand, but do not. > > And KiB, which is ugly but well defined, albeit less known (at present). > > > > | Also, the kB vs KiB mess is so ambiguous and complex that > > | it virtually guarantees that the _writers_ of documentation > > | will get it wrong occasionally and only confuse the readers > > | more. > > > > KiB is not ambiguous. KB demonstrably is. > > And therefore KB is NOT useful for communication, _especially_ technical > > communication. > > Grep around in your RFC directory, and apply your argument. The KiB > definition will _create_ ambiguity in technical communication which > did not exist before. Agreed. I think almost technical guys assumed that 'KB' (or kB, or kb, or something ;-) IS 1024 bytes. Know even they starting to loose their belief about old one, and that new and 'strange' 'KiB'. Imho '1000 bytes = 1 kbytes' was only used by some tricky hardware vendors to trick their costumers (they could show bigger values ...). But even my sister knows that when someone's speaking about computers, 'kilo' means 1024, not 1000. It's like when we declared that direction of electrical current is from positive to negative. Yes, we CAN change it now, because we know that it's not the right direction of electrons in real. So, if the 'technical world' already assumed (imho) that 'kilo' is 1024 in computer technology then we shouldn't change it now ... - Gabor - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/