DISTINGUISHING RANKS BY USING RANK CLASS INDICATORS – ADDITIONAL NOTES
1. That a service may have different items of insignia (or other uniform items) for different rank classes does not necessarily mean that that service uses this method. This method is characterised by the fact that such an element is necessary for distinguishing a rank from a rank of a different class.2. In determining the design of rank class indicators, care should be taken to ensure that their function is obvious, potential for the system to be misidentified is minimal, and potential for individual grades to be misidentified is minimal.
3. Rank class indicators whose components vary by size or number are preferable. When significantly different designs are used for this purpose, which design represents which rank class may be unclear.
4. To minimise potential for misidentifying ranks rank class indicators should be employed in a logical sequence. An example of an illogical sequence is that used by Japanese services, in which company officers have one bar, field officers have two bars and general officers have no bars. In this case a logical sequence would be: no bars, one bar, two bars (rather than one bar, two bars, no bars).
5. It is preferable that the appearance of a rank class indicator be consistent across the range of uniforms and garments of the one service.
6. Not many services use such a method for enlisted ranks. Because of its strong connotation with officer ranks and that its application to enlisted ranks is unusual, it is recommended that such a system not be used for enlisted ranks other than in services where doing so is a long-standing and firm tradition.
Commissioned officer ranks page