What’s in a name? That which we call a bike path, by any other name would…

[PotomacCyclist]

ride as sweet?

Greater Greater Washington has been discussing what to call the new protected bike facilities. Some of them think that “cycletrack” brings to mind Cat 6 or bike messenger speed demons, while “protected bike lane” is not quite accurate for two-way paths. So they have decided to start calling these facilities “protected bikeways”.

http://greatergreaterwashington.org/post/25158/out-cycletrack-in-protected-bikeway/

Interesting take, but I think the term might be too long. Other infrastructure terms are more concise and memorable: bike path, bike lane, road lane, bridge, highway, bike bridge, and so on.

They could say “bikeway” but would that be confusing? Would people think that a bikeway is a protected facility (curbs, barriers, flex posts)? Maybe, maybe not. Would people think there is a difference between a standard bike lane (separated only by paint from car lanes) and a bikeway? Possibly. Especially if there is consistency in building bikeways with protection from car lanes, and consistency in using the term “bikeway” only for such protected facilities. DOTs could always start to confuse the two or use the terms interchangeably, which would not be good. Maybe someone can start up a campaign to have the “bikeway” term included in the official guidelines (AASHTO, NACTO) to mean “protected bike facility,” not a typical bike lane that is only marked by a painted line.

Topic

[ShawnoftheDread]

@Tim Kelley 102151 wrote:

But then I don’t expect too many people on this forum to agree with me because the majority of folks here are seven percent-ers…

Outlaw cyclists?

[Tim Kelley]

@ShawnoftheDread 102165 wrote:

Outlaw cyclists?

From the article linked:

[ATTACH=CONFIG]7203[/ATTACH]

[ShawnoftheDread]

How can “no way no how” be a type of transportation cyclist?

[dkel]

@jrenaut 102148 wrote:

Nope. If I meant that, I would have said that. Precision.

You mean, “if I had meant that.” :rolleyes:

[lordofthemark]

@ShawnoftheDread 102169 wrote:

How can “no way no how” be a type of transportation cyclist?

They should have said “Four classes of the population in terms of their relationship to transportation cycling”. To be precise.

[Alcova cyclist]

I will admit to being initially confused by “cycletrack” as noob around here (though not really a noob to cycling). As someone mentioned upthread, “cycletrack” gave me a vision of a banked & looped facility with crazed MAMILs going flat out on carbon fiber road bikes. I did not sound to me like something I wanted to ride on — or could get me from A to B.

Now that I have all of ten or so posts to my name, I feel much more hip to lingo as the kids don’t say. Still, I guess the average person who’s not all that invested in cycling infrastructure would not likely have a good sense of what a cycletrack is just hearing the term — and those who might be in favor of a “protected bike lane” or “bikeway” might think a “cycletrack” sounds like a waste of money and space.

[mstone]

@dkel 102171 wrote:

You mean, “if I had meant that.” :rolleyes:

Accuracy is just as important as precision.

[DismalScientist]

No, accuracy is more important.

[Orestes Munn]

@DismalScientist 102183 wrote:

No, accuracy is more important.

Yes indeed. Error can have zero variance.

[Vicegrip]

@Tim Kelley 102167 wrote:

From the article linked:

[ATTACH=CONFIG]7203[/ATTACH]

They forgot “artisanal”

[jrenaut]

@dkel 102171 wrote:

You mean, “if I had meant that.” :rolleyes:

The “had” is implied. Still precise, just colloquial. Though, now that you bring it up, I think it sounds a little nicer your way.

[dkel]

@jrenaut 102205 wrote:

The “had” is implied. Still precise, just colloquial. Though, now that you bring it up, I think it sounds a little nicer your way.

Like in an implied subject, often called “you understood.” For example, when I write, “stop trying to rationalize your mistakes,” it’s understood that I’m talking to you.

Just as an example.

[jrenaut]

@dkel 102206 wrote:

Like in an implied subject, often called “you understood.” For example, when I write, “stop trying to rationalize your mistakes,” it’s understood that I’m talking to you.

Just as an example.

Well played, sir. You must have taken some advanced math classes.

[dkel]

@jrenaut 102207 wrote:

Well played, sir. You must have taken some advanced math classes.

Precisely! —I mean, accurately!

[chris_s]

I nominate this thread for “Great Moments in Pedantry”.

[Author]

Replies