-
Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Word of warning
- Thread starter mawallace
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
O L Leigh
Established Member
No it doesn't.
It means very simply that pedestrians are not permitted, the same as the other two signs I posted above respectively mean that cycling is not permitted and mobile phones are not permitted. The text below simply QUALIFIES that.
O L Leigh
Yes - pedestrians are not permitted.... to do something. In this case, as the sign says in black and white "passengers must not cross the line". I gather Nitwit Rail (as you call them) have even confirmed this from a post on another forum. It really is time to put this one to bed - it's so simple that even NR can understand it
Ah, another variation.
Seems like the correct signs do exist, but just aren't being used.
As I said above, I suspect they're only replaced when worn/damaged/lost/stolen.
We've highlighted a very serious problem here - but, keeping on topic, the OP is still in the right. However, had the correct sign been there then he wouldn't - but would he have still gone beyond the sign in that case?
O L Leigh
Established Member
Yes - pedestrians are not permitted.... to do something. In this case, as the sign says in black and white "passengers must not cross the line". I gather Nitwit Rail (as you call them) have even confirmed this from a post on another forum. It really is time to put this one to bed - it's so simple that even NR can understand it
Oh please. Now we really are down to hair-splitting.
If you insist that the sign means that pedestrians are not allowed to do something, the thing they are being forbidden from doing is passing the sign. It's the same as not cycling past a sign that clearly states cycling is not permitted or using a mobile phone (or even smoking) where signs clearly show that such activities are not permitted. The text below the pictogram is just there to qualify the sign not to overrule it.
I'd like a link to the forum you are referring to so I can see precisely what question Nitwit Rail were asked and precisely what answer was given. The question "Are members of the public permitted to go past a prohibition notice?" is very different from "Are prohibition notices intended to prevent members of the public wandering around on the track?", for example. I agree that in most instances these notices are placed on platform ends to prevent people wandering down the ramps and into danger but, as I have pointed out, they are not always placed that far up.
I agree that we should put this one to bed, but simply for the reason that I can't be any clearer than I already have been. Anything further I add to this thread would just be repetition.
O L Leigh
http://www.wnxxforum.com/interactive/viewtopic.php?f=22&t=6198&start=125
O L leigh, it's perfectly simple. The text under that sign clears up unambiguity. "Pedestrians are not permitted" is an incomplete phrase, a nonsense. What aren't they permitted to do - jump up and down on the spot? Pick their nose? The text qualifies the sign and clears up the unambiguity - it tells you what the pedestrian is not permitted to do, which is for the umpteenth time is 'cross the line'!!!!
That mobile phone sign - I've seen that in the immigration hall at Heathrow upon the walls. It's qualified by the words 'mobile phone use is not permitted in this area' or similar. What it definitely doesn't say is mobile phone use is not permitted beyond this point - it means it is not permitted in the vicinity of the sign - ie in that immigration hall. Next?
60163 on wnxx said:
O L leigh, it's perfectly simple. The text under that sign clears up unambiguity. "Pedestrians are not permitted" is an incomplete phrase, a nonsense. What aren't they permitted to do - jump up and down on the spot? Pick their nose? The text qualifies the sign and clears up the unambiguity - it tells you what the pedestrian is not permitted to do, which is for the umpteenth time is 'cross the line'!!!!
That mobile phone sign - I've seen that in the immigration hall at Heathrow upon the walls. It's qualified by the words 'mobile phone use is not permitted in this area' or similar. What it definitely doesn't say is mobile phone use is not permitted beyond this point - it means it is not permitted in the vicinity of the sign - ie in that immigration hall. Next?
Last edited:
nedchester
Established Member
- Joined
- 28 May 2008
- Messages
- 2,093
Actually the 'no cycling' sign might mean 'No Bikes' or does it mean 'No Cycling' (in which case you can push your bike passed the sign)
Or the case of the mobile phone sign it might mean 'Do not use mobile phones' or 'Mobile phones not allowed' - see open to interpretation although the cycling one is part of the highway code whereas I didn't know the public had to know their railway pictograms before entering a station??!!!!
Or the case of the mobile phone sign it might mean 'Do not use mobile phones' or 'Mobile phones not allowed' - see open to interpretation although the cycling one is part of the highway code whereas I didn't know the public had to know their railway pictograms before entering a station??!!!!
O L Leigh
Established Member
Thanks for the link. I'm glad you posted the quote as I have no log-in details for that forum and can't access it.
So, Nitwit Rail have qualified the meaning of the word "line". I never really thought that was in question. However, the meaning of the pictogram that accompanies it has not been addressed. I might just take that task on myself and make contact with Nitwit Rail on this matter.
**EDIT**
The prohibition notice is not specifically a railway pictogram. You can see it elsewhere.
**EDIT 2**
Mind you, the HSE are clear enough on their definition of the sign. Click.
O L Leigh
So, Nitwit Rail have qualified the meaning of the word "line". I never really thought that was in question. However, the meaning of the pictogram that accompanies it has not been addressed. I might just take that task on myself and make contact with Nitwit Rail on this matter.
**EDIT**
The prohibition notice is not specifically a railway pictogram. You can see it elsewhere.
**EDIT 2**
Mind you, the HSE are clear enough on their definition of the sign. Click.
O L Leigh
Last edited:
O L Leigh
Established Member
Right, question asked of Nitwit Rail.
I have asked them to confirm if I would be correct in assuming that any sign showing this pictogram prohibits members of the public from passing beyond it and, for good measure, what legislation is used to back this up. I will post the answer as soon as I receive it.
O L Leigh
I have asked them to confirm if I would be correct in assuming that any sign showing this pictogram prohibits members of the public from passing beyond it and, for good measure, what legislation is used to back this up. I will post the answer as soon as I receive it.
O L Leigh
The sign has a clear meaning but must be qualified, just as a mobile phone being crossed out doesn't mean you're not allowed a mobile phone - but rather using it in that area (and the text will say where/when as appropriate).
HOWEVER, if the symbol was there purely on its own with NO qualifying text then it would literally mean 'no pedestrians', or 'no mobile phones'. Of course, you cannot have a sign like that as it would be ridiculous! There are some exceptions, namely a no smoking sign where there are no exceptions.
Yes, a company protecting sensitive information may still ban ALL mobile phones. At film premieres, you'll be asked to hand it in or attach a tamper-proof sticker over the lens that will be checked upon leaving. You may also have an area where no pedestrians can ever go - but that's a different story.
I am not willing to let this rest on the basis that someone who is wrong is simply getting tired and saying that it's time to move on - but we can all agree that the signs should be updated to make it totally unambiguous in the future.
I have never suggested that people go beyond and start wandering around on the track. But, we're only asking if a law was broken and it clearly wasn't.
HOWEVER, if the symbol was there purely on its own with NO qualifying text then it would literally mean 'no pedestrians', or 'no mobile phones'. Of course, you cannot have a sign like that as it would be ridiculous! There are some exceptions, namely a no smoking sign where there are no exceptions.
Yes, a company protecting sensitive information may still ban ALL mobile phones. At film premieres, you'll be asked to hand it in or attach a tamper-proof sticker over the lens that will be checked upon leaving. You may also have an area where no pedestrians can ever go - but that's a different story.
I am not willing to let this rest on the basis that someone who is wrong is simply getting tired and saying that it's time to move on - but we can all agree that the signs should be updated to make it totally unambiguous in the future.
I have never suggested that people go beyond and start wandering around on the track. But, we're only asking if a law was broken and it clearly wasn't.
O L Leigh
Established Member
As I said, perhaps.
Then again, I think we've taken the topic right out the 'n'-th degree beyond what most folk would consider necessary. I still firmly believe that the pictogram is entirely clear and would be understood by the majority of rail-users.
The problem with changing a visual sign for a written one is that not everyone can read English, or even read at all. Changing it for a Highway Code style "No Entry" sign would have much the same effect, as it is not a sign that you can rely on being universally recognised and understood as not everyone can be relied upon to be familiar with it.
*Checks*
Seems to be working OK. You may need to empty your cache if you're experiencing problems with it loading.
O L Leigh
90019
Established Member
I got it working by changing .JPG to .jpg
http://lh4.ggpht.com/_jWLrM3gLC2Q/RnApf3ggOsI/AAAAAAAAAnc/HcfNq-2b3Ok/IMG_0369.jpg
O L Leigh
Established Member
Really...? That alteration gets me a 404.
This is the pic I was linking to.
Not sure if the terms of the Quiet Coach require me to surrender my mobile phone and what I can only assume is any music player before taking a seat, and to travel with the tip of my left index finger to my lips throughout the journey.
In any case, it was a side issue just to illustrate that a sign does not require text to have it's meaning clarified.
O L Leigh
This is the pic I was linking to.
Not sure if the terms of the Quiet Coach require me to surrender my mobile phone and what I can only assume is any music player before taking a seat, and to travel with the tip of my left index finger to my lips throughout the journey.
In any case, it was a side issue just to illustrate that a sign does not require text to have it's meaning clarified.
O L Leigh
Last edited:
90019
Established Member
Odd, I was getting a 404 with the original link :?
O L Leigh
Established Member
Yes, we got that. However, what wasn't clear was precisely what question was asked. I believe I've asked a slightly different question that might just ellicit more information.
O L Leigh
You can see the text to the left of the symbols can't you?
Also, why is it prohibited to put your finger in front of your mouth? (prohibition signs don't always have a cross in front of them)
O L Leigh
Established Member
Oops. Just spotted you'd editted you post.
OK, so perhaps I've been paraphrasing slightly. As you will have seen if you'd followed my posted link to the HSE website the official meaning of the pictogram is "No access for pedestrians". In effect this has much the same meaning as "Pedestrians are not permitted", which is actually a complete and grammatical sentence. If the sign really did mean "pedestrians are not permitted to...", then the pictogram would show whatever activity it is that is prohibited.
With regard to your second point about mobile phone signs at Heathrow, I'm not going to take individual instances one at a time and explain them away, nor will I concede that it undermines my point. The purpose of signs such as these are to quickly and clearly convey a meaning, and they do that. Whether or not a prohibition applies to an area in the vicinity of a sign or the area directly beyond a sign does not make their meaning any less clear.
O L Leigh
Last edited:
90019
Established Member
It doesn't say it is, note the no diagonal line.
O L Leigh
Established Member
You can see the text to the left of the symbols can't you?
Yes I can. But what does that mean with regard to the prohibition notices? According to you, these signs mean that I am not allowed a mobile phone or music player at all as there is no qualifying text to accompany the pictograms.
I wasn't suggesting it was prohibited. In fact, given that the other two pictograms have a diagonal line and this one doesn't it would appear to be a requirement.
You are of course correct in noting that not all prohibition signs have diagonal lines, but that is only on the roads for signs like no vehicular access and the like. All HSE prohibition notices have the diagonal line.
O L Leigh
Yup - no access to the running lines to cross them.
In all of this arguing over meanings etc, I'm losing the plot regarding where you stand on the central issue. Is the OP, in your opinion, guilty of any offence?
I'd argue that outside of the roads there is no set standard for signs and that anything they say should merely be clarified, and this was done in this case by putting up text underneath saying that you shouldn't cross the railway line.
FWIW, the symbol is also used elsewhere, what about this sign I've seen that marks the door to a staff only area:
In that case it's clear that you can only enter the room if you are authorised, thanks to the text below. I can't see how someone could argue that nobody can go in there.
What about this one?
FWIW, the symbol is also used elsewhere, what about this sign I've seen that marks the door to a staff only area:
In that case it's clear that you can only enter the room if you are authorised, thanks to the text below. I can't see how someone could argue that nobody can go in there.
What about this one?
How is this for a cracker, fotted today on a WCML station.
The first sign, the nearly white one says 'Passengers must not pass beyond this point' . Apart from being barely visible and easily missed , there is a second one 22foot futher down the platform saying ' Passengers must not cross the line'.
So if the first one stops any Joe Public passing, who on earth is the second one aimed at ? Staff perhaps? because they are the only persons allowed there.
The first sign, the nearly white one says 'Passengers must not pass beyond this point' . Apart from being barely visible and easily missed , there is a second one 22foot futher down the platform saying ' Passengers must not cross the line'.
So if the first one stops any Joe Public passing, who on earth is the second one aimed at ? Staff perhaps? because they are the only persons allowed there.
What about this one?
That one quite clearly means that humaniods are not allowed; only staff (who are not humans). There is also an imaginary white line at that place that sign is posted, any human going beyond the imaginary white line will be given a £50 fine by a jobsworth in a uniform with nothing better to do. In fact, anyone even looking at the sign may be deemed guilty of an offence and questioned in order to reduce the threat of terrorism. Only people who are qualified members of non-human staff at the place in question are permitted to give an expert opinion on whether the fines are enforceable.
- Status