• @eldain@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    2511 months ago

    I assume you would also introduce a new standard with rounded numbers, metric doors are also 200x80 cm for example, and sizes of everything gets rounded in the rest of the world, too. Timber sizes differ a little between north america and the rest of the world, it is a different framework, you’d get used to it.

    • @static_motion@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      611 months ago

      All I think about is how much current tooling in manufacturing is made to use those round imperial measurements, and how much it would cost to convert/change them over. That’s possibly the #1 reason why the US will never go metric.

      • @eldain@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        811 months ago

        A change like that shouldn’t be done over night, you’d need to go double standard for a while, say 10-20 years depending on the sector. That way you can construct ‘ansi’ buildings while new development is slowly moving to ‘iso’, and machines get the new specs when replaced. Give a heading and industries will slowly adapt.

    • @Hippesthippo@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      211 months ago

      True, would just have to get accepted by the ICC and all the state legislatures who approve state wide code. I have a feeling it will be difficult to convince some of the less forward thinking states to accept metric codes that take into account the rounding…. Who knows though. I don’t know a ton about that side of things

      • @grue@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        111 months ago

        What does the first letter in “ICC” stand for, again? One would think it ought to already have metric.