dsgood wrote:
>
> >In article >,
> > blake murphy > wrote:
> >
> >> On Sat, 1 May 2010 06:12:08 -0700 (PDT), piedmont wrote:
> >>
> >> > I have a pet peeve about recipes,
> >> >
> >> > 01. Ingredients that aren't commonly known and
> >> >
> >> > 02. ingredients that are local commercial brands that are more
> >>than a > single spice or herb and an
> >> >
> >> > 03. ingredient without quantity or to taste .
> >> >
> >> > If one posts a recipe they should
> >> > help by clarifying these short comings in notes at the start.
> >> >
> >> > mike (piedmont)
> >> > the practical bbq'r
> >>
> >> the one that gets my goat is 'one can of [whatnot].' um, what
> >>size can? even the somewhat archaic '#2 can' would be helpful.
> >
> >Unless you live in a country which has never used "#2 can" as a
> >quantity for anything. You're better off specifying weight or volume.
>
> The recipes which annoy me aren't usually in this newsgroup but in
> cookbooks. Particularly old cookbooks.
>
> I remember a recipe which called for measuring with an empty can from a
> particular brand of coffee. A brand which had apparently once been
> common, but hadn't been for decades.
>
> And then there was the recipe which called for a dime's worth of
> hamburger.
>


Got a recipe that needs 'the amount that fits in a can of lard'. It's
for a large quantity of end product, so guessing the 'can' was rather
large