Talk:Peak bagging
|
|
I merged UK-centric material on this subject from the hill bagging article; most of it is in the "For and Against" and "British Isles" sections. See the history for hill bagging for contributors. Gdr 16:15, 2004 Jul 7 (UTC)
Good call, I din't know this page existed when I set up hill bagging (probably should of checked more thoroughly).Grinner 09:19, Jul 8, 2004 (UTC)
Metric equivalents
The metric equivalent of 3000 feet is 914.4 m. It looks like this is too precise. But in fact many hills in the British Isles have triangulation pillars at or near the top of the hill and it using these it is possible to measure the height with an accuracy of better than a metre. So the fraction of a metre may turn out to be important. For example, Ben Avon in Scotland has a spot height of 914 m but is not considered a Munro as it does not reach 3000 feet. See the essay "Allowing for measurement error - a principled approach to peak bagging (http://bubl.ac.uk/org/tacit/tac/tac36/allowing.htm)" for a slightly tongue-in-cheek look at this issue.
So please don't round these figures. They are exact conversions of exact figures. Gdr 18:12, 2004 Jul 7 (UTC)
- If you are going to be so picky about precision, you should at least be consistent and put the extra significant digit on your feet (e.g. 3000.0 feet is 914.4 meters. --Mouser 19:42, 8 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- No. These figures are numbers, not measurements. (Would you write, "there are 100.0 centimetres in a metre"?) Gdr 18:30, 2004 Jul 11 (UTC)