On Sun, 22 Aug 2004 16:07:35 +0100 someone who may be "PeterE"
wrote this:-

Interesting opinion. Road markings were put there in the first place to
restrict drivers. Most road markings are there to enforce particular laws.

Incorrect. Most road markings are the white lines along the side of
roads and in the middle. (Most of) these do not indicate a
particular law (the major exception are solid lines in the middle of
the road), rather they are provided to allow motorists to drive
faster. The converse of removing these lines has the effect one
would expect.

Only some markings along the road indicate laws. Parking
restrictions and junctions being examples.


--
David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E
I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK government
prevents me using the RIP Act 2000.

David Hansen wrote:
On Sun, 22 Aug 2004 16:07:35 +0100 someone who may be "PeterE"
wrote this:-

Interesting opinion. Road markings were put there in the first place
to restrict drivers. Most road markings are there to enforce
particular laws.

Incorrect. Most road markings are the white lines along the side of
roads and in the middle. (Most of) these do not indicate a
particular law (the major exception are solid lines in the middle of
the road), rather they are provided to allow motorists to drive
faster. The converse of removing these lines has the effect one
would expect.

Only some markings along the road indicate laws. Parking
restrictions and junctions being examples.

Relatively few roads have white lines along the side of the carriageway.
These are normally rural primary routes, where the intention is to narrow
the apparent width of the road, something I might assume you support.

Apart from dotted white centre lines, all other road lining is to encourage
adherence to road traffic law.

Personally I'd love roads without any signs or markings. I don't think you
would.

--
http://www.speedlimit.org.uk
"The mood and temper of the public in regard to the treatment of crime
and criminals is one of the most unfailing tests of civilisation in any
country." (Winston Churchill)

On Sun, 22 Aug 2004 18:30:33 +0100 someone who may be "PeterE"
wrote this:-

Relatively few roads have white lines along the side of the carriageway.
These are normally rural primary routes,

They are certainly seen more often on rural roads. Urban roads often
have pavements and the kerb stones act as a marking of the edge of
the road.

where the intention is to narrow
the apparent width of the road,

Incorrect. The intention is to mark the edge of the road. The main
aim of this is to encourage motorists to keep away from the edge of
the road and reduce damaging to the bank. Where there is a
substantial amount of tarmac the intention is much the same, only
the aim is to reduce the edge of the tarmac being crumbled. Both are
part of the speeding up the motorist agenda of decades of transport
policy.

Cycle lane markings are primarily intended to narrow the apparent
width of the road. However, again this is not to do with particular
laws.

Apart from dotted white centre lines, all other road lining is to encourage
adherence to road traffic law.

Incorrect. See above.

Personally I'd love roads without any signs or markings. I don't think you
would.

Don't try and get a job mind reading, you are not very good at it.
The idea of no signs or markings is a straw man, but I would remove
many road markings for the reasons discussed earlier in the thread.


--
David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E
I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK government
prevents me using the RIP Act 2000.

David Hansen wrote:

"PeterE" wrote...

Relatively few roads have white lines along the side of the
carriageway. These are normally rural primary routes,
where the intention is to narrow the apparent width of the road,

Incorrect. The intention is to mark the edge of the road. The main
aim of this is to encourage motorists to keep away from the edge of
the road and reduce damaging to the bank

....by narrowing the apparent width of the road, which is what he said.

Strewth...


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.742 / Virus Database: 495 - Release Date: 19/08/04

JNugent wrote:
David Hansen wrote:

"PeterE" wrote...

Relatively few roads have white lines along the side of the
carriageway. These are normally rural primary routes,
where the intention is to narrow the apparent width of the road,

Incorrect. The intention is to mark the edge of the road. The main
aim of this is to encourage motorists to keep away from the edge of
the road and reduce damaging to the bank

...by narrowing the apparent width of the road, which is what he said.


How does marking the edge of the carriageway to keep people on it equate to
"narrowing the apparent width of the road"?

Brimstone wrote:

Relatively few roads have white lines along the side of the
carriageway. These are normally rural primary routes,
where the intention is to narrow the apparent width of the road,

Incorrect. The intention is to mark the edge of the road. The main
aim of this is to encourage motorists to keep away from the edge of
the road and reduce damaging to the bank

...by narrowing the apparent width of the road, which is what he
said.

How does marking the edge of the carriageway to keep people on it
equate to "narrowing the apparent width of the road"?

Because, in rural areas, the line is a small distance in from the edge of
the carriageway and the line itself, of course, has a width (often 150mm).
This has the effect of making the usable width of carriageway appear less
than if you ran your wheels along the blacktop/grass interface

Stimpy wrote:
Brimstone wrote:

Relatively few roads have white lines along the side of the
carriageway. These are normally rural primary routes,
where the intention is to narrow the apparent width of the road,

Incorrect. The intention is to mark the edge of the road. The main
aim of this is to encourage motorists to keep away from the edge of
the road and reduce damaging to the bank

...by narrowing the apparent width of the road, which is what he
said.

How does marking the edge of the carriageway to keep people on it
equate to "narrowing the apparent width of the road"?

Because, in rural areas, the line is a small distance in from the
edge of the carriageway and the line itself, of course, has a width
(often 150mm). This has the effect of making the usable width of
carriageway appear less than if you ran your wheels along the
blacktop/grass interface

Do people habitually and deliberately run along this "blacktop/grass
interface" that most English speaking people call "the edge of the road"?

"Paul Weaver"

Paul,

Don't know why, but every time I open one of your posts I get a message
about installing a Greek language pack.

PeterE wrote to uk.transport.london on Sun, 22 Aug 2004:

Relatively few roads have white lines along the side of the carriageway.
These are normally rural primary routes, where the intention is to narrow
the apparent width of the road, something I might assume you support.

Er - I think you'll find the intention is to show the edge of the road
to motorists at night, bearing in mind that such roads are normally
unlit.
--
Annabel - "Mrs Redboots"
(trying out a new .sig to reflect the personality I use in online forums)

Annabel Smyth wrote:
PeterE wrote to uk.transport.london on Sun, 22 Aug 2004:

Relatively few roads have white lines along the side of the
carriageway. These are normally rural primary routes, where the
intention is to narrow the apparent width of the road, something I
might assume you support.

Er - I think you'll find the intention is to show the edge of the road
to motorists at night, bearing in mind that such roads are normally
unlit.

That's far to obvious a concept, it's not "oppresing the motorist".