2 Nov
2001
2 Nov
'01
9:25 p.m.
On Nov 2, 20:12, Richard Erlacher wrote:
Well, that's interesting for sure. Having been in
engineering since
1963, I
have to say I've heard the term "one-of"
countless times, since that's
been the
main thrust of my work since that time, and it is
short for one-of-a-kind
I've never heard "one-of" before, only "one off" (and "2
off", "3 off",
etc) to describe a quantity. It's commonly used here, not just in
engineering.
--
Pete Peter Turnbull
Network Manager
University of York
3 Nov
3 Nov
5:19 a.m.
Yes, it makes me wonder where I've been.
I've worked in the aircraft industry, rubber products manufacturing, aerospace,
municipal engineering, and electronics, the latter for over twenty years, mainly
building proof-of concept prototypes, yet I've not heard the terms "one
off"
(and "2 off", "3 off", etc.) to describe a quantity, as you've put
it. I don't,
even for a moment, deny that these are commonly used terms, as the response from
this group certainly verifes they are, but, I'm puzzled that I've managed to
avoid noticing for so long.
Dick
----- Original Message -----
From: "Pete Turnbull" <pete(a)dunnington.u-net.com>
To: <classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org>
Sent: Saturday, November 03, 2001 4:25 AM
Subject: Re: One-off vs. One-of (was Re: CPU design at the gate level)
On Nov 2, 20:12, Richard Erlacher wrote:
Well, that's interesting for sure. Having
been in engineering since
1963, I
have to say I've heard the term
"one-of" countless times, since that's
been the
main thrust of my work since that time, and it is
short for one-of-a-kind
I've never heard "one-of" before, only "one off" (and "2
off", "3 off",
etc) to describe a quantity. It's commonly used here, not just in
engineering.
--
Pete Peter Turnbull
Network Manager
University of York
8232
days inactive
8232
days old
1 comments
2 participants
participants (2)
-
edick＠idcomm.com -
pete＠dunnington.u-net.com