SigFigs when there are zeros at the end

[Chazef]

This has always been a bit confusing to me as I've had mixed responses to my queries about sigfigs. If I had a number like 200 which was supposed to be at 2 sigfigs, should I therefore write it as 2.0x10^2 or leave it as 200, because in doing so that would suggest the last zero is a significant figure which it isn't. The damn physics textbook just alternates between the latter and former approach and I can't quite remember how the chemistry book deals with it. It just feels a little stupid to try putting something like 10 to 1s.f. as 1x10^1. wikipedia says there is debate over what to do (if I recall correctly) and that if you have non-significant zeros, you should put a dash at the top of the last significant figure (or at least, this is one possible method). Anybody able to help clarify this?

[pi]

200 by itself is 3 sig figs, 2.0x10^2 is correct to 2 sig figs

[Homer]

What if its 0.02 would that be 3 or 2 or 1 sigfigs

[pi]

That's one sig fig, but 2 decimal places