File talk:Flag of the United States specification.svg
Untitled[編輯]
On the description page, I claimed that
- Presumably, the dimensions were originally intended to yield a ratio of L : B : D : K = 1 : 25 : 10 : 4/5, while A,C,E,F,G,H result from the flag's layout.
Well, since this is a presumption, I have no proof. But here is what I thought: The dimensions given by law are inconsistent. There must have been rounding errors. I think the starting point was: "Let's take a stripe of a certain width L." This fixes A,C,E, and F. Obviously, D is intended to be 40% of B, while G and H need to be D/12. So, the main question is: what should B be? I can't imagine that it was thought to be 24.7xL. I think it was intended to be 25xL, and when the ratios were adapted to yield A=1, the occuring numbers had so many decimal places that someone decided to fix B=1.9 .
Again, I have no proof, but this is the only reasonable explanation I can think of. What else should the number 1.9 result from? --Pumbaa 15:58, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
- Note that the flag ratio is actually not defined by law. The diagram in Executive Order 10834 says 1.9, but the text of the order gives a list of flag sizes that are "authorized for executive agencies". In that list, the ratio varies as low as 1.27.
It isn't "obvious" that "D is intended to be 40% of B". D is in fact 41.58% of B, and believing that round numbers were intended is little more than numerology.
- I would find your argument more convincing if the values you calculate rounded to the values given in the executive order. Do you really think they would take D=10/13=0.7692... and get 0.76 instead of 0.77? And how does K=4/65=0.06153... round to 0.0616?
- Anyway, the only actual inconsistency in the executive order is that , and . User:dbenbenn 20:27, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
- Yes, and strangly C has four digits after the decimal point, and E and F only three...? --Pumbaa 23:17, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
- Well, in the executive order they clarify that C is supposed to be exactly 7/13 (and the same with L). User:dbenbenn 23:53, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
- Yes, and in my opinion this shows that they didn't really care too much about rounding errors. --Pumbaa 11:43, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
- Well, in the executive order they clarify that C is supposed to be exactly 7/13 (and the same with L). User:dbenbenn 23:53, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
- Yes, and strangly C has four digits after the decimal point, and E and F only three...? --Pumbaa 23:17, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
- Hm, D is exactly 40% of B. I think that's the way the number .76 was calculated. So, it's B:D = 25:10 rather than L:D = 1:10, while rounding B doesn't hurt much. That's how I would have calculated the numbers. And I'm pretty sure that round numbers were used. But that's just my opinion. --Pumbaa 23:17, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
- Yes, you're right, my mistake. User:dbenbenn 23:40, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
- Hm, D is exactly 40% of B. I think that's the way the number .76 was calculated. So, it's B:D = 25:10 rather than L:D = 1:10, while rounding B doesn't hurt much. That's how I would have calculated the numbers. And I'm pretty sure that round numbers were used. But that's just my opinion. --Pumbaa 23:17, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
- I don't know where the diameter of the star came from. The 4/5 theory was taken from Wikipedia. I wonder why the accuracy is 10-4, which makes absolutely no sense. I'm pretty sure it must result from divisions of integers and (possibly aggregated) rounding errors.
- BTW: are you sure that every kind of flag may take the dimensions from Part II of EO 10834? Isn't that just special flags diverging from the official one? --Pumbaa 23:17, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
- Yeah, I guess you're right. The executive order says that "Flags manufactured or purchased for the use of executive agencies" should have sizes given in the table; and it seems to say that other flags are supposed to have ratio 1.9. User:dbenbenn 23:53, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
- BTW: are you sure that every kind of flag may take the dimensions from Part II of EO 10834? Isn't that just special flags diverging from the official one? --Pumbaa 23:17, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
Okay, just let me point out once again that the presumption was just an idea of mine and may be total rubbish. I didn't mean to interfe with American national affairs. --Pumbaa 11:43, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
- Well, it's too late now; the President has been alerted, and will be addressing the nation tonight about this crucial issue ;). User:dbenbenn 18:10, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
- Oh no, not again... LOL --Pumbaa 00:09, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
The image itself[編輯]
Has anyone noticed that the image itself -- not the entire thing, but the image of the flag -- is not in the specified 10:19 proportions? It's closer to 100:195. Does anyone care? John Reid 21:14, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
Letters[編輯]
Why? Does anyone know why "I" and "J" are skipped in this specification? Koavf (talk) 10:35, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
- Normally, those letters are omitted to avoid confusion between each other. Jake the Editor Man (talk) 11:20, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
