Template talk:Convert/doc

This starts with "This template can be used to show measurement quantities as primary and converted secondary units.." yet most of the templates I see are things like in-to-cm, treating the US units as "primary" and the metric system that more-or-less everyone else use as "secondary". I'd say that is backwards.

An encyclopedia written for an international audience should use the international standard units wherever possible. Sometimes translations should be provided for American readers, and some topics need particular units — acres and sections for North American farms, mu,li and jing for some Chinese topics, troy ounces for precious metals, points for typography, dots per inch for printers, ... — but otherwise I'd say we should use metric units everywhere.

Here's an example of what I consider correct use of units, from Wikitravel [1]:

Top speed on some of the recently built lines, like Beijing-Tianjin, is 350 km/h (nearly 220 mph). Older major lines, like Nanjing-Shanghai-Hangzhou, top out at 250 km/h (150 mph). Other lines are limited to 160 or 200 km/h (about 100 or 125 mph).

To me the only question there is whether to delete "(about 100 or 125 mph)" as unnecessary. I'd say yes, but there's room for debate. Sandy Harris 10:18, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

I agree with you Sandy, but I guess that's a decision for the Editorial Council, if it actually still exists.

Also, this template is under development at present and might end up being completely different...

Caesar Schinas 10:25, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

The point of the templates is to ensure accesability to all readers. Yes, most of the world uses SI units. However, most of the english speakers with access to the internet, are americans. Instead of picking faveorites, we should use both, with the primary being whichever pertains to the articl. For instance an article about great britain, the chunnel, or even the russian space program should use SI (Imperial), while an article about texas, the US Navy, or Belize should use Imperial (SI). Like Caesar says this is a work in progress, and will end up as something compeletely different. This particular form started as an attempt to import WP templates. Unfortunately, I found out later on that the WP version requires thousands of subtemplates to make a single conversion work. Thus Caesar and I have been trying to find ways to make a conversion template that doesn't require nearly as many templates. Until a few moments ago, I though the answer may have been {{In to Cm}} and those like it. They were much simpler than {{Convert}}, but needed an individual template for each conversion. Still much simpler than the thousands needed for {{Convert}}. Now, Caesar has found a way to do it that requires a single template. The prototype is still in his sandbox, with a minor modification in my sandbox. The only drawback is that his version doesn't have all the functionality of my {{In to cm}} templates, however that is seeming like a minor issue. It is a delicate balance between funcionality, and complexity.Drew R. Smith 10:40, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Adding Fahrenheit Conversions

I've added Fahrenheit Conversions. In the proccess "{{lc:" was taken out of the first switch. For some reason "{{lc:" in the main switc produced a "missing round operand" for Fahrenheit conversions. I have checked all functions of {{convert}} and this seems not to have any ill affects.Drew R. Smith 12:20, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

That was what made it case insensitive, and it wasn't working with your new options because they should have been in lowercase inside the template so as to be case insensitive when used. I have fixed this. Caesar Schinas 15:40, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

I'm lost. Aren't temperatures normally in upper-case?Drew R. Smith 15:47, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

See my response on my talk page - my changes allow both upper and lower case to work for all units. Caesar Schinas 06:27, 17 June 2009 (UTC)