Table column meanings in spec

[kengruven]

In the spec, I'm seeing a few minor issues which aren't severe enough to prevent implementation but do make it slightly more confusing than need be:

1. §29.2: "There are seven columns titled “name,” “print,” “c/s,” “c/i,” “M,” “value,” and “definition.”"
   The last two columns are actually titled "definition value" and "definition unit".
2. §30.2: "There are seven columns titled “name,” “print,” “c/s,” “c/i,” “M,” “value,” and “definition.”"
   There are in fact 8 columns: "name", "kind of quantity", "print", "c/s", "c/i", "M", "definition value", and "definition unit".
3. §44.2: "The meaning of the columns is declared in §34." §34.2: "The meaning of the columns is declared in §30.2."
   There's nothing technically wrong here but it is inconsistent. Several sections (like 43 and 47) refer to §30.2, while several others (like 36 and 37) refer to §34, which in turn says to look at §30.2. It would be nice if all of these pointed to the first section, instead of sometimes pointing to another reference.
4. §49.2: "The meaning of the columns is declared in §49.2."
   This section consists in its entirety of a pointer to itself.

[gschadow]

The columns are described in each paragraph that introduces the table. The table under §29 is for dimensionless units and have no kind of quantity, so it is different.

Agree that in all of those places where it says "M," "value," and "definition" it should be changed everywhere to "M," "definition value," and "definition unit".

Agree that all references to §34.2 should instead go directly to §30.2.

In §44.2 the reference goes to §34, should also be §30.2

§49.2 should say:

There are five columns titled “name,” “print,” “c/s,” “c/i,” and “value.” The name is the full (official) name of the prefix. The symbol recommended for use in print is listed in the column “print.” “C/s,” and “c/i” list the symbol in the case sensitive and the case insensitive variants respectively. The value is the value by which the prefix-less unit atom would be multiplied to arrive at the value of the prefixed unit.

Also, §30.2 has a typo, the word "this" in "... use in print this is listed ..." should be deleted.

---

I would like to change the workflow status of this notice to "accepted" but I don't know where these workflow features are now since the migration to GitHub.

[timbrisc]

Included in v2.2 release

[kengruven]

The page https://ucum.org/ucum now says "Version: 2.2" and "Date: 2024-06-17" but all of the items listed by me (and agreed upon by @gschadow) are still present.

It's true that an extraneous word "this" was removed, but that was never really part of my issue.

[timbrisc]

My apologies. This issue will be reopened and addressed as soon as possible.