Re: [Maposmatic-dev] issues on maposmatic

[Jeroen van Rijn]

On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 20:43, Thomas Petazzoni
<address@hidden> wrote:
>> In submenu 5. Paper size
>> imho the cm² should be replaced with cm
>
> Well, the reasoning is that we have the choice between:
>        120 cm x 140 cm
> and
>        120 x 140 cm²
>
> I remember having a discussion with David Decotigny on this, and I was
> not really in favor of the 120 x 140 cm² notation, but I'm not sure
> "120 x 140 cm" is correct.

120 cm x 140 cm is correct, for a total of 16,800 cm²

120 x 140 cm² would be incorrect, as that would suggest you have 120
pieces of paper, each of which has a surface area of 140 cm² of
unspecified dimensions. This could be 120 pieces of 2 cm x 70 cm, 4 cm
x 35 cm, and so on, or even a mix.

Of course no reasonable person would think "120 x 140 cm²" to mean 120
separate pieces of paper, except linguistic purists, engineers and
paper salesmen. Whether these are reasonable people is up for
interpretation. ;)

So in short you could say 16,800 cm², which given the lack of
dimensions is useless, or 120 cm x 140 cm, which is useful.

Just a thought, mind you.

Regards,
Jeroen

-- 
↑↑↓↓←→←→BA[Start]