In message , Matt Wheeler
writes
I suspect the argument is that those disabled with poor eyesight will
find it easier to read a destination in a large font rather than
having to try and read a smaller font which is necessitated by having
1 or more via points listed in the same space.
Yes I suspect that as well.

The problem is as another poster has pointed out, the logic is that if a
person with certain type of disability can't do something (in this case
read a small "via" point), then *nobody* is allowed to do it.

The upshot of this is the truly stupid situation where we now have 13s
saying simply "Aldwych" or "Golders Green" [1] with no indication of the
very important places they serve en route.

That said, I've not seen an official statement that the removal of "via"
points is being done for this reason. Can anyone else (Paul C?)
confirm or deny this?

Plus, dont forget that
disabled does not necessarily mean wheelchair bound, all wheelchair
bound people can be classified as disabled, but not all disabled are
wheelchair bound.
I would never have assumed that it did. But I can't see the relevance
of that to this to the argument. Indeed, providing consideration for
wheelchair use can sometimes *disadvantage* other passengers (eg
reducing the number of seats and stanchions and increasing the space
between those stanchions).


[1] Interestingly with the word "Station" beneath in lower type!
--
Ian Jelf, MITG
Birmingham, UK

Registered Blue Badge Tourist Guide for London and the Heart of England
http://www.bluebadge.demon.co.uk