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

[Orestes Munn]

@chris_s 102210 wrote:

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

Hey, you all told me you were 22!

[rcannon100]

Fake Bike Lane Parking Ticket. Share it ~ Print it ~ Slap it.

[Sunyata]

@rcannon100 102564 wrote:

Fake Bike Lane Parking Ticket. Share it ~ Print it ~ Slap it.

ICK… If people are going to make things like this, the least they could do is make it grammatically correct. :confused:

[bobco85]

@Sunyata 102649 wrote:

ICK… If people are going to make things like this, the least they could do is make it grammatically correct. :confused:

What was grammatically incorrect in the ticket? Everything looked fine to me.

[dkel]

@bobco85 102651 wrote:

What was grammatically incorrect in the ticket? Everything looked fine to me.

It’s unacceptable to brazenly split infinitives, and commas between clauses are important. Also, “when you park in or block a bicycle lane….” In addition, “Bike” and “Lane” don’t deserve capitalization at the end of a sentence, unless they deserve capitalization at the beginning of a sentence, too.

[Orestes Munn]

@dkel 102653 wrote:

It’s unacceptable to brazenly split infinitives, and commas between clauses are important. Also, “when you park in or block a bicycle lane….” In addition, “Bike” and “Lane” don’t deserve capitalization at the end of a sentence, unless they deserve capitalization at the beginning of a sentence, too.

All that and I would have changed “significantly increase” to “increase significantly.” However, the text looks like a bunch of weenie pleading and assumes the recipient gives a minuscule crap about the convenience and safety of cyclists. What it really needs is a tenacious adhesive.

[dkel]

@Orestes Munn 102657 wrote:

All that and I would have changed “significantly increase” to “increase significantly.”

I did appreciate the appearance of an Oxford comma in the penultimate sentence, though.

[americancyclo]

@rcannon100 102564 wrote:

Fake Bike Lane Parking Ticket. Share it ~ Print it ~ Slap it.

How’s about we get the local police officers to issue real tickets instead?

[PotomacCyclist]

@dkel 102653 wrote:

It’s unacceptable to brazenly split infinitives, and commas between clauses are important. Also, “when you park in or block a bicycle lane….” In addition, “Bike” and “Lane” don’t deserve capitalization at the end of a sentence, unless they deserve capitalization at the beginning of a sentence, too.

J. Tiberius Kirk says it’s OK to split infinitives:

[Orestes Munn]

It is permissible to split infinitives on alternate Thursdays, but only when not to would be particularly awkward or stilted, e.g., up with which I will not put.

[bobco85]

@dkel 102653 wrote:

It’s unacceptable to brazenly split infinitives, and commas between clauses are important. Also, “when you park in or block a bicycle lane….” In addition, “Bike” and “Lane” don’t deserve capitalization at the end of a sentence, unless they deserve capitalization at the beginning of a sentence, too.

Ah, I didn’t even notice those!

My time reading articles, blogs, comments, etc. online has decreased my grammar-detecting abilities (I noticed recently that I tend to phonetically read Internet text due to all the spelling errors I encounter). I’m usually just impressed enough if someone can use the proper version of homophones like “they’re, there, and their” and “two, to, and too” (I’ve actually given up on people using the correct version of “its” versus “it’s”). Right now, the only thing that really annoys me is when people use “should/could/would of” instead of the correct “should/could/would have.”

[cyclingfool]

@dkel 102658 wrote:

I did appreciate the appearance of an Oxford comma in the penultimate sentence, though.

Vive le Oxford comma!

[Orestes Munn]

@bobco85 102673 wrote:

Ah, I didn’t even notice those!

My time reading articles, blogs, comments, etc. online has decreased my grammar-detecting abilities (I noticed recently that I tend to phonetically read Internet text due to all the spelling errors I encounter). I’m usually just impressed enough if someone can use the proper version of homophones like “they’re, there, and their” and “two, to, and too” (I’ve actually given up on people using the correct version of “its” versus “it’s”). Right now, the only thing that really annoys me is when people use “should/could/would of” instead of the correct “should/could/would have.”

It really is bad out there. The confusion over the use of “which,” “that,” and “who(m)” is complete, even among professional writers, with “that” replacing the other two. Misuse of “leverage,” “beg the question,” “in waiting,” and “hedge,” are also pervasive in the newspapers and embitter my coffee every morning.

[chris_s]

@dkel 102653 wrote:

It’s unacceptable to brazenly split infinitives,

No it isn’t.

[cyclingfool]

@dkel 102658 wrote:

I did appreciate the appearance of an Oxford comma in the penultimate sentence, though.

Gotta love that comma. It may be referred to by any of a number of names: Oxford comma, serial comma, and Harvard comma.

[Author]

Replies