Apparently, Time is considering adding metric to all measurement numbers.
While
the source isn't the most convincing, it is still worth sending a carefully worded email prodding them along in the right direction (and who knows they might send something back that confirms the story). So, that's what I did.
I have heard you may be considering providing metric equivalents to any US customary measure supplied in your magazine.
Rather than having a policy of using US customary first and then metric in parentheses after, it would be nicer to see the original measurement (regardless of type) first and the other in parentheses. I feel that representing the data in this way is far more accurate and avoids the temptation to convert a metric figure into US customary and then back again. In particular, this avoids the story having a measurement of 100 meters, it being converted into 100 yards and then represented as "100y (91.44m)".
And they replied.
Thank you for letting us hear from you. The editors appreciate the
interest that prompted you to write, and they have made attentive
note of your comments. We hope that you will continue to share your
thoughts with us.
Best wishes.
TIME Letters
