Issue link: https://iconnect007.uberflip.com/i/1161956
40 SMT007 MAGAZINE I SEPTEMBER 2019 A measurement made in 1895 determined the length of the meter at 39.370113 inches relative to the imperial standard yard. The Weights and Measures (Metric) Act of 1897 in conjunction with Order in Council 411 (1898) made this relationship official. After 1898, the de facto legal definition of the yard came to be accepted as 36⁄39.370113 of a meter [7]. The yard (known as the "international yard" in the United States) was legally defined to be exactly 0.9144 meters in 1959 under an agree- ment in 1959 between Australia, Canada, New Zealand, South Africa, the United King- dom, and the United States. In the U.K., the provisions of the treaty were ratified by the Weights and Measures Act of 1963. The Impe- rial Standard Yard of 1855 was renamed the United Kingdom Primary Standard Yard and retained its official status as the national pro- totype yard [7]. Standardization Resistance Of course, changes to standards can be the subject of resistance too. Spelling reform for the English language, for example, has been proposed multiple times over the past few cen- turies. But even though spelling reform could bring "quicker, cheaper learning, thus making English more useful [internationally]," spell- ing reform has only "rarely attracted wide- spread public support, and has sometimes met organized resistance" [11] . American Noah Webster is widely consid- ered to be the publisher of the first English lan- guage dictionary, and it's worth noting that his first edition (1806) included an essay which proposed spelling reform. By the 1828 edi- tion, Webster's proposed spelling reforms were slowly becoming the American standard [12] . Of course, there are also a few countries that have yet to officially transition to the metric system—the United States being perhaps the most stalwart and complete it its resistance. It has been pointed out the irony that the impe- rial system the U.S. continues to maintain is now officially defined in relation to the metric system standards. Conclusion Unless a standard is defined by royal or gov- ernment edict, standards are generally best when reached through meticulous consensus. Loosening local time constraints to allow for standardized time zones improve transpor- tation, saved lives, and simplified communi- cation and measurement. Creating physical reference standards regularly pushed man- ufacturing skills forward. That pre-existing processes and de facto standards can be pre- served in later iterations of a standard. And the fact that measurement standards con- tinue to evolve with changes and technologi- cal advances being instituted to—quite para- doxically—keep things the same. For all of the imperfections we may see in the process of reaching consensus and defin- ing and implementing a method and enforcing a standard, the standards process has worked in similar ways throughout history. SMT007 References 1. "Standard," wordreference.com. 2. "The Ancient Egyptian Calendar," ancient-egypt- online.com. 3. "Calendars Through the Ages," webexhibits.org. 4. "Solar Year," britannica.com. 5. "History of Measurement," wikipedia.com. 6. "Inch," britannica.com. 7. "Yard," wikipedia.com. 8. "Railroad gauge and chariots," snopes.com. 9. M. Rosenberg, "Time Zones," thoughtco.com, April 2, 2017. 10. "History of the Metre," wikipedia.com. 11. "English-Language Spelling Reform," wikipedia.com. 12. "Failed Attempts to Reform English Spelling," merriam-webster.com.