On 07 Jan 2017 10:36:28 GMT, Puckdropper
puckdropper(at)yahoo(dot)com wrote:

wrote in
:

On 06 Jan 2017 23:54:16 GMT, Puckdropper
puckdropper(at)yahoo(dot)com wrote:


It's the same way with shoes. People keep insisting shoe sizes are
the same, but that just doesn't match my reality. I just sent back a
size 9 boot to trade for an 8.5, but I have a 9.5 shoe that fits
perfectly. The boots I'm wearing now are 10's.

If I had my way about it, the foot would be measured and the shoe
would be specified to fit the measurements of the foot. The
dimensions would be inches or centimeters, not whatever measurement
the manufacturer decided to use today. Now you know your 25.5cm by
7.76cm (length by max width across the ball of the foot) foot will
likely match a 26cmx8cm shoe.

That really doesn't work either. Width matters and even that doesn't
tell everything. I wear 6E shoes, not because my foot is
exceptionally wide, rather because my instep is very high. There are
very few shoe brands that leave enough material to get around my foot.

So we'll have to add a few numbers to the shoe designation. No matter
the system, there will always be people who have difficult feet to fit.
My intention is to be able to measure the foot using standardized units
rather than some number and a width code that means "doesn't not fit bad
enough to do something about it."

I think the numbers are standard, however the numbers you want to add,
aren't. These really change the fit.