Talk:Coplanar waveguide

Conductor-backed ?
What does "conductor-backed" mean more specifically? Electron9 (talk) 22:36, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Just wrote a description of that. This is worth a read. It might be better to move this discussion to the coplanar waveguide article talk-page. --catslash (talk) 22:48, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
 * It's great to have a CPW page. I've been meaning to start one since 12 October 2007. --catslash (talk) 22:57, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Looks great now ;) Electron9 (talk) 00:48, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

Using the article "a" before the phrase "coplanar waveguide"
I never realized that the word "a" could be so controversial. I changed the first sentence to read:

"A coplanar waveguide is a type of electrical planar transmission line..."

Then, SpinningSpark changed it back, and removed the "a", and now it says:

"Coplanar waveguide is a type of electrical planar transmission line..."

Spinningspark's comment was:

"Reverted good faith edits by Navigatr85 (talk): The article is not needed, and is in fact, misleading. CPW is a type (or design) of waveguide, not an object."

What? Yes, a CPW is a type of waveguide. And it is also an object. That doesn't mean that you should omit the word "a". See the wikipedia article for waveguide. It says "A waveguide is a structure that guides waves..." You wouldn't say "Waveguide is a structure that guides waves."

Also see the wikipedia article for Waveguide (optics). It says "An optical waveguide is a physical structure..." It uses the word "an." See also Zero-mode waveguide and Slotted waveguide, which both use the article "a" in their first sentences. Also please take a look at this article, which describes the situations where articles are omitted before nouns in ENglish grammar: [] A coplanar waveguide doesn't fit into any of those categories.Navigatr85 16:17, 13 October 2019 (UTC)


 * Yes, CPW like string (and waveguide) can be either a count noun or a mass noun depending on the context. The context of is a type of seems to demand the latter. catslash (talk) 17:41, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Precisely right, and uncountable nouns are the first category in the grammar guide linked, so actually, it does fit one of them. We can have CPW is a type of transmission line... (uncountable) or A CPW is a transmission line... (countable), but not A CPW is a type of transmission line... (ungrammatical—fails agreement). I suggest that the uncountable form is more suitable for this article. Unlike pipe (fluid conveyance), we do not buy definite lengths of it in the shops (or anywhere).  It is more akin to piping (which is always uncountable) than pipe. SpinningSpark 17:11, 14 October 2019 (UTC)