Db79 and Herman Thrust are attempting to design an pants standard. I’d like to mention that Gonzonia has had a Pants standard for some time.
1) Pants are blue denim(slightly faded).
2) Pants are straight leg.
3) Pants are relaxed.
If they don’t fit this, their not pants.
8 Responses to “Pants and Standards”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
June 26th, 2003 at 10:17 am
See this is more of a “what sorta pants are you?” type thing - which is good… perhaps we could have a campaign to let people know how bloggers really feel about pants.
I am still interesting in your ideas for a wider standard that would give all nations simple, usable, and understandable choices in Pant styles.
June 26th, 2003 at 10:20 am
I see. Yes. But this is the standard of Gonzonia. I will continue to give input though into an international standard that we will consider adopting.
June 26th, 2003 at 11:10 am
Speaking of a “wider standard”, words like “wide” and “relaxed” are also being abused. In order to avoid the metric system, can we decide on a set of items that should be in everyone’s home that can be used to determine leg width in an objective manner? “A number 5 bowling ball will fit through the leg”, etc. I don’t have a number 5 bowling ball (if in fact they’re measured in this manner), but there must be something in the home or office (but not my office, because it’s not equipped for online pants shopping) that will serve as the new yard stick.
June 26th, 2003 at 11:20 am
I agree. Perhaps “A one gallon jug will fit through the leg” can work. Even though you may not currently have a one gallon jug in your house, they are readily availabe at both convenience stores and grocery markets.
June 27th, 2003 at 3:30 pm
I’m struggling myself in this whole relaxed bit… and i don’t want to use the metric system either. I think at some point we are going to have to provide diagrams to define “relaxed” or use everyday objects to determine pants size.
I have a sneaky feeling that vendors won’t like selling pants that “can fit a bowling ball in them” - but then wouldn’t it be a much funnier world?
June 27th, 2003 at 4:05 pm
Pants Classification Working Draft v0.2
Redefining the Pants standard.
June 28th, 2003 at 4:32 pm
possibly ratios between pant leg width and leg width - so pants that are approximately once the width of the leg (measured at the knee) are “tight”, one and a half times the width of the leg are “relaxed”, and twice the width of the leg are “wide”.
June 30th, 2003 at 1:16 pm
But that’s where the problem lies britta. We must first define the width of the leg. Because I’m sure that guy in the next room would not find the same pants “relaxed” as I do.
I think there needs to be a standard leg/body size that we use. That will at least allow a starting point. Then I could go and say…My leg is slight larger than the standard, therefore I know that relaxed will not be as loose as intended.