# Is there a preferred way to typeset the dimensions of physical volumes? [closed]

I was wondering if there is a preferred way to typeset the size of 3-dimensional volumes with a specific unit in a scientific paper. For instance, let's say I want to describe the dimensions of a volume that is 1.88 mm by 1.88 mm by 8 mm; I have seen the following alternatives in the literature (I give my examples using the units package, but the specific package is irrelevant to the question):

$\unit[1.88]{mm} \times \unit[1.88]{mm} \times \unit[8]{mm}$
$\unit[1.88 \times 1.88 \times 8]{mm^3}$
$\unit[1.88 \times 1.88 \times 8]{mm}$


The first two options seem reasonable, although I seem to find the second option most often in literature. Option three seems off to me, although I've seen it in some papers. Is there a best practice from a typography point of view, or is it a matter of taste?

-
Lines 1 and 2 are OK. Just a matter of taste. Line 3 is for sure not correct regarding the dimension. Finally I'd prefer the siunitx package to typeset physical quantities. – Thorsten Donig May 2 '12 at 16:07
have a look at siunitx texdoc.net/show.php/pkg=siunitx – David Carlisle May 2 '12 at 16:07
@ThorstenDonig I'd say only 1 is correct, as a quantity is a number-unit combination. Option 2 is often used, but is not strictly accurate. Option 3 is out-and-out wrong, but again very common. This is not to do with TeX, of course, but is covered in the siunitx docs. – Joseph Wright May 2 '12 at 17:18
possible duplicate of What package should I use to typeset units? – Marco Daniel May 13 '12 at 10:05

## closed as off topic by Marco Daniel, lockstep, Joseph Wright♦Jun 2 '12 at 22:00

Questions on TeX - LaTeX Stack Exchange are expected to relate to TeX, LaTeX or related typesetting systems within the scope defined in the FAQ. Consider editing the question or leaving comments for improvement if you believe the question can be reworded to fit within the scope. Read more about closed questions here.