Interesting topic.
I would think that rounding to whatever the application requires would be the best route. For example, if dealing with mfg tolerances at .xxx but result or measurement data is at .xxxx, round to the third place. It keeps apples with apples so to speak. I have only seen this not be effective when dealing with absolute minimum and maximum limits.
As for things like QS9000 requiring Cpk minimums of 1.33, I would round to two places as the reqs are written, 1.324=1.32 and 1.325=1.33 etc. I realize that the Cpk example is a minimum limit requirement, but we set our software and procedures up to reflect two decimal places and it was acceptable to our registrar, so...
As for your own systems purposes, I suppose selecting the resolution you feel is sufficient to the application and round to that.