Page 145 - Anthropometry, Apparel Sizing and Design

138 Anthropometry, Apparel Sizing and Design

sufficient information so consumers could recognize themselves. It should serve the
purpose to help consumers find the garment that suits them best. It would provide all of
the essential information as it was suggested half a century ago such as the 14R or
12T+, in a way that citizens from around the world could have a good understanding
of the designated size. The only and biggest dilemma is which system should be used?
The metric system, centimeters, or the use of the imperial system, inches? Thus this
question is not solved, and neither is it clear which type of pictogram should be used.

5.4 Designing international size designations and
methods of implementation

When the metric system became the new measurement system, its purpose was to
facilitate all types of transactions that used measurements. In 1788, in the Cahiers
de Doleances, people called for the reform of weights and measures. They were asking
for “one law, one king, one weight, and one measure.” As a result the metric system,
which is the equivalent to the quarter of a meridian divided by 10 million, became
mandatory starting on July 1, 1794. This modern system of measurement, equivalent
to near the length of 3ft or an aune (described later), allowed objects to be express in
abstracted, commensurable units that relate to an absolute standard (Alder, 2002). It
contrasted with the ancient system where measurements were inseparable from the
object being measured and customs of the community that performed the measure-
ment. At that time, not only did the physical standards differ from community to com-
munity, but also the technique of measurement depended on local custom.

5.4.1 A parallel with the apparel industry

A parallel could be done with the actual nonconformity and the absence of a specific
system from the apparel industry. Nowadays, manufacturers/brands may have a same
size designation although as mentioned earlier, their measuring points may differ from
one another. As a result, one may use the waist at its narrow point to define its sizing,
whereas another may use the waist where the garment is in position when worn, which
could be 1in. lower than the narrowest point of the waist. Or again, different manu-
facturers/brands may use the exact same measuring point, associated with the same
size number, but this may be based on different underlying measurements. As a result,
both could use the waist at the same position, both can use the same size designated
number such as 12, but one could refer to a size 12 as being 28in. (71cm) waist, and
the second could consider a size 12 for a waist of 32in. (81cm). Therefore the mea-
surements themselves are different. Some manufacturers/brands use this to their
advantage as a marketing strategy, and others just size the items as it was done by their
predecessors. Although consumers seem to be unhappy with the actual size designa-
tion, making it mandatory to be installed on a garment may have a negative impact on
retailers and manufacturers.