14.5 doesn't cover weights; I don't have 14.100. I prefer the leading zero as sometimes the decimal point is tougher to see. I don't feel like anyone is running out of zeros, so it's not like saving whales.

Here's how other areas of publication use it:

https://blog.apastyle.org/apastyle/2010/07/a-post-...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leading_zero

and this one that supports it all

https://www.ibm.com/support/pages/what-are-standar...

in that case would it not be better to use ounces

It's up to your company rules.
But, for 0.1 LBS. or .1 LBS, I would use 0.1. If you use .1, it can easily be mistaken for 1. Decimal points can sometimes either not print dark enough, or blend with background.

ctopher, CSWP
SolidWorks '19
ctophers home
SolidWorks Legion

3DDave
Yeah, neither of those standards really talked about weights and the preferred way of writing them. I am definitely leaning towards the inclusion of the leading zero but the last thing I want to have to do is rework a drawing because there happens to be a correct way due to some obscure ASME standard and someone being a stickler for the rules.

mfgenggear
We do use ounces when the weights get lower but the same issue still applies for the really small parts.

ctopher
That's what I figured. I thought somewhere there might be some standard since there seems to be a rule for just about everything but that seems to not be the case.

I like leading zeroes for the same reason I like the Oxford comma. It hurts nothing, combats ambiguity, and just plain looks better.