Talk:Joint European standard for size labelling of clothes

message: The table EN 13402-2 has a description of how to measure boys to wear pantyhose and stockings.  Is that an error, or is that a metrosexual thing?
:Neither. They are/were also a pretty common piece of infant clothing in some regions (for both male and female infants), typically made from cotton. Not sure about the exact English term in that context (or whether the concept is known at all in the English-speaking world), but Google for the German term Kinderstrumpfhose to see examples of the product. Comparing the German and English articles on pantyhose, I get the impression that in the English-speaking world, only the nylon-version for women is known, and not any other unisex variants for young kids, where thermal insulation rather than sex appeal was a design criterion. Markus Kuhn 17:57, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That, and men do wear tights in theatre, dance and some sports. The "men in tights" phrase comes from "medieval-via-Hollywood" costumes to begin with. Plus, "tights" doesn't always mean pantyhose, anyway. 
--Snowgrouse (talk) 07:28, 27 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Men in Tights?

message: For number ranges, I prefer to use the format 'x to y' and avoid formats such as 'x-y'. That is because the use of 'to' eliminates ambiguity with the format '-y' as used for negative numbers. I know that the reader can interpret this article correctly from the context but what do others think about using 'to' instead? Bobblewik 00:10, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: In this article, column width is a rather limited resource, so having an entire " to " between numbers should be out of the question IMHO. Also, replacing "-" with " to " will just make life more difficult for translators. Let's stick with the hyphen please. If people insist, I'd be able to live with an en-dash (–) instead of a hyphen (-). Markus Kuhn 19:50, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I know that the reduction in ambiguity (good) comes with an increase in language dependence (bad) and an increase in column width (bad). I would rather that trade-off did not exist. I respect your judgement so perhaps I will reconsider. There is an active discussion about format for number ranges at: Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style_%28dates_and_numbers%29#Number_ranges. Your contribution will be welcome there. Regards. Bobblewik 22:00, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  hyphens versus 'to' for number ranges 

message: Can somebody please inform me as to when these new metric clothes sizes come into force. I live in the UK and have noticed that in the back of some of the Christmas catalogues, the measurement guides have all of a sudden converted to using centimetres only. I thought this was a bit strange as there is no information explaining the change over. I'm a supporter of metrication and am glad to see the UK is moving forward in its metrication process but there has been little information in the news. I'm glad were're finally using centimetres to measure clothes instead of inches as i coulndn't tell the difference between an inch and a yard. 
23:31, 15 Nov 2005
:These standards are a voluntary agreement between manufacturers and retailers who participate in the standardization prozess. They are not legally binding (unless governments decide to pass laws making them so, which I do not expect in this case). Therefore, there is no single well-advertised official switchover date like there was for the euro. It will be up to individual retailers to negotiate with their suppliers, what measuring and labeling conventions to use. I wouldn't expect any massive switchover before sometimes in 2006, when the fourth and final part of this standard will finally be published. Markus Kuhn 22:30, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I wouldn't say the standardization has much to do with metrication, as much as international trade. Before the standardization, there were several different standards in different countries, and a complete standardization could probably ease up things. 81.232.72.53 02:36, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The British Standard BS 3666 was widely ignored by manufacturers, leading to the current confusion of vanity sizing —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Esthameian (talk • contribs) 22:47, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

text: If anyone knows about adoption of this standard, please add it under Adoption section. 217.132.106.205 (talk) 10:38, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  When? 

message: Is it really sensible that dress size redirects to here? Surely there's an article about the different standards of dress size internationally. --Nathan (Talk) 16:19, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Be bold and write one, if you feel qualified in the subject. So far, this one seems to be the only article in Wikipedia on dress sizes, hence dress size redirects here until someone writes a general overview article on dress-size systems worldwide. Markus Kuhn 12:52, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dress size 

message: is there a standard for rib sizes which correspond with different dress sizes?  Or is it just bust, waist and hips? Ammi 12:34, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Do you mean under bust girth? 178.201.101.32 (talk) 08:55, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: ribs

message: How come that apparently foot length is measured but foot width not? There is a significant variance in the population regarding this. --Abdull 19:24, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Possibly because the standard doesn't seem to be used for shoes, just for socks and stockings, which generally are made of relatively flexible fabric. 惑乱 分からん 18:29, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The Mondopoint system is probably intended to be used for shoes. Sauer202 (talk) 20:02, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  No foot width? 

message: The table talks about "Cup Size" as a secondary measure (in parenthesis) but it is not stated until way later what it actually is. Should it be in the list listed prior? Jim77742 13:50, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cup size 

message: I’ve lately seen designations like “M CN 175/84A” (cf. H&M US, H&M Japan). This appears to be a Chinese metric standard. Does anyone know specifics and is it similar or even compatible to EN 13402? — Christoph Päper 13:21, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: This appears to be height/bust measurements in centimetres. I can't find any information on what the A stands for though. I bought a jacket that reads 165/88A and though my bust is only 83cm, it is still very tight around my upper body. 156.155.132.58 (talk) 08:24, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  CN ''height/secondary'' 

message: This article would really benefit from a section on adoption, if anyone has any information. It looks like a very welcome advance over ad hoc labelling, but I haven't come across it much in UK clothes shops (although I'm no shopaholic). Are clothes manufacturers resisting its implementation for cost or other reasons? Are there plans to enforce or promote its introduction? If experience is anything to go by the UK will consider starting to come around to the idea several decades after the rest of Europe has adopted it across the board. Beorhtwulf (talk) 17:45, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I have noticed that shops seem to be using the single letter "S", "M", "X", "XL" etc in accordance with EN13402, but hiding the pictogram. These are mown observations and to publish that would be a matter of WP:OR (which is a no-no). I agree with Beorhtwulf that a section on adoption, whether it be done openly or covertly, would be useful. Martinvl (talk) 18:47, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adoption 

message: The letter codes, added with this edit, seem strange from a systematic PoV: from XXS through L for both, male and female, size designations a step of 8 cm is used, thereafter it gets inconsistent, although 12 cm seems to be a common step size.
Code	(men)  	(women)
L   	102–110	98–106
XL  	110–118	107–119
XXL 	118–129	119–131
3XL 	129–141	131–143
4XL 	141–154	143–155
5XL 	154–166	155–167
If it were systematic and the step size increased one step earlier for female garments the sequence looked more like this:
Code	(men)  	(women)
L   	102–110	98–106
XL  	110–118	106–118
XXL 	118–130	118–130
3XL 	130–142	130–142
4XL 	142–154	142–154
5XL 	154–166	154–166
So, is this table really correct? — Christoph Päper 11:25, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I have found a new reference, you might like to look at that. Martinvl (talk) 13:32, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  That paper doesn’t cite the standard itself, but  which in turn transcludes an earlier version of this very Wikipedia article. — Christoph Päper 15:03, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Letter code table correct? 

message: An editor has removed references to the cup on grounds that it is a derived measurement.  It might be, but as it is included in teh standard as a separate measurement, it has a place in the artcile.  I have reinstated it. Martinvl (talk) 22:18, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay. Anyhow, does the standard really specify an AA cup and does it really leave out the I cup as the table indicates? Does it set a useful upper limit, e.g. N cup? 178.201.101.32 (talk) 08:54, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cup sizes 

message: This article has not been edited since 2012. But I haven't seen any clothes or shops making use of this norm (e.g the pictograms). Does that mean, the norm is dead and nobody is working on it anymore?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.228.228.12 (talk) 21:59, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Uptodate? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on EN 13402. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111203153017/http://www.consumo-inc.es/Noticias/Notasdeprensa/2008/tallasIngles.htm to http://www.consumo-inc.es/Noticias/Notasdeprensa/2008/tallasIngles.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:27, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified