largest to smallest is correct. 1 mile is larger than 20 meters. if i had specified numerical value or somesuch, maybe you'd be correct. though significance works as well.

[–] Kacarott@aussie.zone 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Largest to smallest is at best ambiguous. It can refer to the size of the number itself, or the size of the unit.

There is a reason this exact concept in maths/computer science is known as the "significance" of the digit. Eg. The "least significant bit" in binary is the last one.

[–] Umbrias@beehaw.org 1 points 1 day ago

significance refers to a measurement certainty about a number itself, especially its precision! and is unrelated to the magnitude/scale. the number and dimension "2.5634 mm" has more significant digits than the number "5,000 mm", though the most significant digit is 2 and 5 respectively, and least significant 4 and 5 respectively. this is true if i rewrite it as 0.0025634 m and 5 m. it does work for doing what you say in this case because a date is equivalent to a single number, but is not correct in other situations. that's why i said it does work here.

largest to smallest increment is completely adequate, and describes the actual goal here well. most things are ambiguous if you try hard enough.