TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
Subject:kHz From:"Geoff Hart (by way of \"Eric J. Ray\" <ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com>)" <ght -at- MTL -dot- FERIC -dot- CA> Date:Tue, 29 Sep 1998 06:38:09 -0600
Dave Neufeld wondered <<Which is "more" correct: kHz or KHz?>>
No argument here. "kilo" uses lower-case k in every scientific style
guide I've ever seen, and capital K is wrong, not "less right".
That's part of the ISO standard for metric prefixes, by the way,
_not_ a personal opinion.
<<The MS Style Guide (copyright 1995, not the latest 3rd edition)
contradicts itself. Sun's Read Me First! says kHz in its list of
abbreviations (why is that such a long word? <g>).>>
Yes, there are industry-specific exceptions to a few of the rules,
but not this one. Sun is right. But if you're looking for correct
abbreviations for scientific units of measure, consult a science
style guide such as the Council of Biology Editors or American
Chemical Society guides, not a computer guide.
--Geoff Hart @8^{)}
geoff-h -at- mtl -dot- feric -dot- ca
When an idea is wanting, a word can always be found to take its place.--Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
