please empty your brain below
|
Woolwich Ar'nal is my choice.
Great Aunt Annie | 11.01.09 - 9:03 a.m. | #
|
Woolwich senal
Colin in Thailand | 11.01.09 - 9:13 a.m. | #
|
I'm with (the) Woolwich
Mark | 11.01.09 - 9:25 a.m. | #
|
There's a precedent for this. All the Victoria line indicators say "Walthamstow" not "W'stow central!"
Dan | 11.01.09 - 9:51 a.m. | #
|
If you buy a ticket at the mainline station by credit card, it comes up on your statement as "Woolwich Arse".
Henry | 11.01.09 - 9:58 a.m. | #
|
Personally, if they can't just call it Woolwich I think I'd lose the white space and make it WoolwichArsenal.
NiC | Homepage | 11.01.09 - 10:16 a.m. | #
|
"Woolwich A" is occasionally used on Southeastern trains, if only to differentiate from the adjacent Woolwich Dockyard station
Novaelius | 11.01.09 - 10:19 a.m. | #
|
If they scrap the next train order information from the first column it would fit.
Marc | 11.01.09 - 10:35 a.m. | #
|
How about Woolwich A
chairwoman | Homepage | 11.01.09 - 11:17 a.m. | #
|
'Woolwich A' would be the best, yup
Geofftech | Homepage | 11.01.09 - 1:15 p.m. | #
|
Woolwich Arsnl?
Adrian | 11.01.09 - 1:21 p.m. | #
|
I agree. It would be a lot tidier if the station name was displayed as 'Woolwich', or to disambiguate, 'Woolwich A.'.
I see the departure boards on the DLR are just as hopeless as those on the tube...
Andrewh | 11.01.09 - 2:23 p.m. | #
|
"Woolwich A" is occasionally used on Southeastern trains, if only to differentiate from the adjacent Woolwich Dockyard station
Does that mean Woolwich Dockyard is shown as "Woolwich D"?
If so, do people ever wonder what happened to Woolwich B and Woolwich C?
IanVisits | Homepage | 11.01.09 - 2:52 p.m. | #
|
Erm - bit surprised you didn't think of this, Diamond[no space]Geezer, but how about WoolwichArsenal? It fits.
slabman | 11.01.09 - 3:33 p.m. | #
|
Any solution that removes the word Arsenal is ok with me
Johnny Topaz | 11.01.09 - 4:16 p.m. | #
|
Why not 'Woolwich Arsenl' - it's not perfect, but it is perfectly understandable.
PJ | 11.01.09 - 5:15 p.m. | #
|
Woolwich Armory solves it.
Bina | 11.01.09 - 6:01 p.m. | #
|
Exactly the same thought struck me when I travelled on the DLR today.
To be really pedantic, as I am, it is meaningless to talk about sixteen characters being one too many - you and your obsession with counting everything! It is a proportional font with different character widths. Having a capital W when you are short of space is not a good start.
To me, someone who works with font technology all day long, the obvious solution is to choose a very slightly narrower font when displaying "Woolwich Arsenal". After all the deficiency is at the very most the width of a lower case L. And for starters there is no need to make the space so wide. You may not even need to get rid of it altogether as slabman suggests.
An alternative solution is simply to put the word "mins" in a slightly smaller font to create the necessary space. After all it is pretty obvious that they are minutes.
Of course the problem could be that the database stores the station name as a maximum of fifteen characters as when it was constructed that was long enough for the existing stations. A classic computing faux pas that someone else has to sort out many years later.
I don't think your idea of just "Woolwich" will get approval. When they renamed Didcot to Didcot Parkway a lot of people didn't get off when they should have done. When challenged they replied, perfectly logically, that they were told to change at Didcot and the previous station wasn't Didcot. It was Didcot Parkway. So you will get the situation where people say "I want Woolwich Arsenal - not Woolwich"!
On a slightly different subject they seem to have done a good job of amending the timetables, line diagrams etc. The only major thing I could see that they had fallen down on is there are some notices that still say "For London City Aiport take the first train to King George V". Its going to be a long wait !
Pedantic of Purley | 11.01.09 - 7:28 p.m. | #
|
Surely they should abbreivate the second word (tastefully). Is the problem that the displays on both trains and stations are linked?
Bowroaduk | 11.01.09 - 7:29 p.m. | #
|
I still to this very day think buses go to the Ealing Body.
Briantist | Homepage | 11.01.09 - 7:58 p.m. | #
|
Woolwich A'l or Woolwich A' is ten times better than W'wich.
Adam S | Homepage | 11.01.09 - 8:12 p.m. | #
|
I forgot to add that for years now the trains on that branch going east alternate the display with the destination and "via C Airport".
Pedantic of Purley | 11.01.09 - 8:53 p.m. | #
|
...not any more they don't, at least on the newest DLR trains. It's "v City Airport" now.
diamond geezer | Homepage | 11.01.09 - 8:57 p.m. | #
|
Maybe shorten "mins" to "min"? Failing that, Woolwich or Woolwich Arsenl for me!
SELondoner | 11.01.09 - 9:30 p.m. | #
|
With TFL determined to erase "qualification points" from bus ultimate destination blinds I'm surprised they kept the "Arsenal" appendage.
Bowroaduk | 11.01.09 - 11:43 p.m. | #
|
As a matter of interest (or otherwise), the ATOC "How to Present Timetable Information" guide gives Woolwich A as the recommended abbreviated form for 10, 12 or 14 characters.
Woolwich Dockyard becomes "Woolwich D" for 10 or 12 characters, "Woolwich Dock" for 14, and "Woolwich Dockyrd" for 16.
Barry Salter | 12.01.09 - 5:11 a.m. | #
|
How about "Wooly's Arsenal" in memory of the dear departed store, that would fit!
Surrey Girl | 12.01.09 - 9:24 p.m. | #
|
|
|
TridentScan v2.10.0 | Privacy Policy
|