Talk:Network length (transport)

Comment
Right now, I think this page is using the Australian definitions of the terms. In North America (and also Germany?), the terms "Line length" and "Route length" mean the exact opposite of what is listed on the proposed page (i.e. those two definitions would be switched in America). Just so you know... P.S. Can you also include a direct link on this page to the German one? That might be useful... --IJBall (talk) 02:56, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Here's a link to the German article: Netzlänge. The issue you have identified may be simply my translation.  I have translated "Linienlänge" as "route length" and "Streckenlänge" as "line length", but as the four words "Linie", "route", "Strecke" and "line" relevantly have similar meanings, it may have been appropriate, at least in the present context, to translate them the "switched" way round (and in that regard, I note that google translate actually translates them both ways, if the whole article is pasted into google translate).  Now you know why I have created this page in user space, not main space ... as I do not have technical expertise in this area, the best I can do is attempt a translation, and then invite other editors to comment on what I have done ... on another topic, I now agree that the appropriate name for this article, when it is moved to main space, is "Network length (transport)", because the expression "network length" is also used on a lot of internet pages about computer technology. Bahnfrend (talk) 05:25, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Yeah, so far as I can tell, in North American, the terms in German exactly correspond to the way they are used in North American (in other words, the German definition "Line length" is exactly the same as it is here in North America, as far as I can tell). But apparently in Australia, "route length" = the German-American "line length" and visa versa, as in Australia they use "route" to mean what in German is called "line". I suspect Liamdavies can speak more to how the terms are defined in Australia... --IJBall (talk) 05:48, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Since I posted my comment above, I have done some google research into the issue discussed above. According to this source, page 94 (which appears to have been influential in academic circles), the issue discussed above arises due to the imprecision of the English language.  What the source observes is that whereas Scandinavian and Continental European transport academics have a professional practice of drawing a sharp distinction between lines ("an operational element of the public transport system") and "the route that the bus or rail vehicle follows through the city" (my emphasis), the English language has often (at least until this source was published in 2005) used the word "route" in describing both concepts.  To minimise the risk of confusion, the source then follows the Scandinavian/Continental practice.  Since the source was published, other academic literature (including Australian academic literature) on transport networks has done the same.  When I have the time, I will add this and a number of other sources to the article, and amend the article to take into account what the sources say. Bahnfrend (talk) 08:53, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Bahnfrend's also an Australian, so I'm sure he may comment on the Australian lingo as much as I may, although I too found the terminology surprising. I suggest we stick to what mainstream English language literature states each to mean, and place a list of alternative terms in differing nations/regions at the bottom of each section.
 * I have so far found one source (UN, so reputable) that defines both route length and track length, found here. I hope that may be useful in this article and will continue to search; I think the links I highlighted earlier can also be used to indicate differing usage. Oh, also, I'm planning on adding a map to the example, I think it will help to explain the concept if there is an image to accompany it. Liamdavies (talk) 12:32, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, I found that source, too. As there now seems to be consensus as to the terminology used in the sources now linked to this page, and as the article is already visible on search engines, I have amended it to refer to those sources and adopt that terminology.  I will add the references later, when I have the time.  Further amendments can also be made later to add information and references about alternative terminology. Bahnfrend (talk) 14:23, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
 * I have drawn up an example map of the system used in 'Calculation example' and added it to the page. If anyone can suggest any alterations please do, but keep in mind that my Inkscape skills suck... majorly. Liamdavies (talk) 15:04, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

External links modified (February 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Network length (transport). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131113002142/http://www.ntdprogram.gov/ntdprogram/Glossary.htm to http://www.ntdprogram.gov/ntdprogram/Glossary.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 12:18, 16 February 2018 (UTC)