On Wed, 2009-12-02 at 12:31 -0500, wrote:
> >
> > If this is *fixed* as you suggest, then replication of the table is fine
>
> > with a citation to the authority.
> >
> > My concern was that if this wasn't stable, that it reflected conversion
> > to and from Euro currency, then replication of a table might not be a
> > good idea.
> >
> > Understanding it as a legacy function changes the wording of the text.
> >
>
> The former national currencies could be called "legacy", but the function
> itself is still applicable to calculations today. But I think the term
> most used is "national currencies" rather than "legacy currencies".
>
> Also note that this function could be revised (and likely will)in the
> future as additional countries join the Eurozone. In fact, this is not
> just a likelihood but almost inevitable, so I wonder whether we can define
> this to be future-proof? For example, allow it to be expanded to include
> additional currencies, according to the already-defined ISO currency
> codes, for future fixed conversion factors as may be promulgated by the
> Council. Otherwise we would need to scramble with an amendment whenever a
> new country adopts the Euro, which happens every couple of years.
Is this function really just a synonym for multiplication with one of a
small selection of factors, or is in fact more happening here (such as
truncation or rounding of the result)?
Andreas
--
Andreas J. Guelzow, PhD, FTICA
Mathematical & Computing Sciences
Concordia University College of Alberta
