Route Cards: conurbation in bold or not?

[Philip Whiteman]

Sorry, I know it is an anorak point but.....


Should a village/town through which you are passing be indicated in bold [or caps if preferred] when there is no boundary sign?


I ask this question as I was testing a route for a fellow club member at the weekend. He only uses bold where the conurbation is obviously identified by a boundary sign.  I know that other organisers use bold irrelevant of boundary signs.   There is potential confusion for riders if they are directed to x hamlet and then pass through that hamlet without realisation.

[Manotea]

Up to you really, I wouldn't sweat it. FWIW I prefer intermediate village/towns to be shown in CAPITALS rather than in bold. It's easier on the eye.

[Greenbank]

IMHO, I'd say no (to either bold or CAPITALS) if there's no sign to tell you that you are passing though said place.

[JStone]

Don't care either way, so long as:

a) the convention being used is clearly stated on the routesheet, and

b) it's used consistently throughout

Having said that, my preference is for places passed through in CAPITALS.

Edit: bounday signs can go missing between route validation and ride date, but there are often other clues (eg shop names) to location

[The Seldom Killer]

I would advise putting it in highlights if it is clear that you are passing through it. There are some ways of passing through a place that are clear that you are doing so without a boundary sign. There are others that are not.

On one occasion I have passed a boundary sign when the routesheet wasn't emboldened or capitalised but as the route then diverted away from the centre of the place before even passing a house I understood the logic. This is the key really. Does it make sense to you and a novice rider in the way that the instructions are laid out. If so then the instructions are sound.

For my tuppence worth. All place names in baps, all highlighted names in bold, all streets or other named points of reference in italics.

[iakobski]

I can't remember which org it was, but his excellent routesheets included the abbreviation "BP" so there was a distance on the routesheet for each boundary post passed. Very helpful in so many ways.

NB, conurbation in the OP had me scratching my head for a bit.

[frankly frankie]

I'd say yes, because the Caps (or whatever) is really a shortcut for "go to this place (then resume with the routesheet)" which is an instruction that works for me regardless of how you identify when you've got there.

[Greenbank]

The problem comes from the use of several variations.

Some organisers use bold or capitals to specify towns that are passed through on the ride (boundary sign or not).

Some organisers use bold or capitals to specify towns that are passed through next (boundary sign or not). Until it's the next town then the name is not in caps/bold.

Some organisers use bold or capitals only for boundary signs passed. I've seen several rides that go past a boundary sign and then turn off on another road (to bypass the village/town) without passing a single house (and therefore not really going 'through' the town).

There's no single standard, so none are wrong as long as the standard being used is clearly stated at the top of the routesheet.

[ My stash of scanned/soft-copy routesheets is at home, so i can't check any specific rides I may be thinking of). ]

[Martin]

On my events I take it to be in caps if you pass the village / town sign (either on the way in or out); you don't necessarily have to pass through the centre. And it's only on caps if the instruction on the route takes you straight there; if you go to an info or control first it's not it capitals.

I assumed the reason for this convention was so you could find your way back on route if you missed a turning and thus knew which places to head for.

[MSeries]

Are you asking what the 'guidelines for route sheet writing' says ? I don't know if there is such a thing. If not then it's a free for all.  What *I* think it *should* be is irrelevant but I'll tell you anyway. If we pass through a place put it in bold and capitals, further more if the route goes the signposted way to a place, say so, don't choose other place names from the same sign that points in the right direction at a particular junction. K. I. S. S. The route sheet isn't there for a mental challenge.

[vorsprung]

For us non GPS users the bold or caps places let us see roughly where the route is going on the map

It is possible to pass "through" a place but there is no boundary sign.  Also it is possible to see the boundary sign but not hit the "town centre"

The Elenith routesheet explictly mentions boundary signs if they are relevant.  I'd take that to be the way to use boundary signs, not as delimiters for if the route has visited a bold/caps "location" or not

[mattc]

Are you asking what the 'guidelines for route sheet writing' says ? I don't know if there is such a thing. If not then it's a free for all. 

This came up last time around: I think the Organiser Guidelines section of AukWEb includes a suggested format for routesheets. I think the stress is on SUGGESTED (or suggested)

(I don't recall Boundary Signs being discussed, so apply "Common Sense" !)

[MSeries]

Boundary signs don't mean a great deal with large metropolitan administrations.

[Weirdy Biker]

I use capital letters in this case.

If it is just the boundary sign before any habitations, I note this.  It can be confusing if you mark a town as being passed through but you don't actually go past any houses.

That said, there is no convention.  In my experience route sheets are either handed down from generation to generation (inheriting the quirks of their forebears) or are written up based on how the organiser would like to see route sheets done.

[frankly frankie]

There are guidelines - accessible via 'Official' on the AUK website -
and on this point they say this (which I don't agree with BTW, specifically I think the last line is exactly how NOT to do it)

Signpost (sp or signed) eg Right sp York–
but if the direction of turn is a place on the route, use capitals
eg Right signed ABERYSTWYTH
only capitalise the next place encountered

[MSeries]

"the next place encountered".

So if I have a route where for example Carlisle is a control and I have signs that point to Carlisle and closer places such as Talkin. My instruction should be "R sp Talkin" or "R sp Carlisle" and not "R sp CARLISLE" even though the control town is signed from here to there.

[Greenbank]

I think it means that this is ok:-

(Ignore the bold for the moment, it's not part of the instructions..)

R sp CARLISLE
L sp CARLISLE
SO @ RAB sp CARLISLE
R sp CARLISLE

but, in order to pick a nicer route you divert off the main/obvious road for Carlisle, to go somewhere else you shouldn't put it in caps, i.e.

R sp Carlisle
L sp Carlisle
1st Exit @ RAB sp Footown
1st R no sp
L sp CARLISLE
R sp CARLISLE

The instructions in bold are the same between the two sets. By not putting it in caps you're essentially highlighting that you don't follow the signposted route all the way to that place name.

Even if both sets of instructions go through Wibbleton and Wobbleton after that find R sp CARLISLE, the signposts should still be telling you to continue on this same road until you do get to Carlisle.

[Greenbank]

Also compare with:-

R sp Carlisle
L sp Carlisle
1st Exit @ RAB sp Footown
INFO CONTROL at railway crossing
1st R no sp
L sp CARLISLE
R sp CARLISLE

You don't go through any other places before Carlisle (you don't go through Footown in my example), but you don't want to follow all signs to Carlisle from the first instruction otherwise you'll miss the info control.

[Weirdy Biker]

Capitals or small caps?

PS: I'm not entirely serious.  The comments about font and typeface simply serve to highlight that we are anoraks.

[Panoramix]

Also compare with:-

R sp Carlisle

I find

.-.    ... .--.   -.-. .- .-. .-.. .. ... .-.. .

much more useful, it keeps my consumption of pro plus down.

[mikewigley]

.-.    ... .--.   -.-. .- .-. .-.. .. ... .-.. .

I thought you were now involving the RSPCA now

[mikewigley]

On the Cleethorpes 200 I went off route on the outskirts of Cleethorpes, so I simply followed signs for Town Centre to get back on route.  Unfortunately when I got there, that town happened to be Grimsby

[Jaded]

I've made a mental note to keep away from and Audax that goes anywhere near Carlisle. 

[Panoramix]

.-.    ... .--.   -.-. .- .-. .-.. .. ... .-.. .

I thought you were now involving the RSPCA now

[PloddinPedro]

As we've seen from the various views posted so far, it's very much a matter of personal preferences, but my three penn'th is .............

..... I find it confusing to have the name of the next place capitalised/emboldened several times way before the instructions actually get there and then somehow there's nothing on the routesheet to indicate which instructions, if any, are actually AT [that place] the reason being that I compose my routes in the 'ole GPS and have to do so with the routesheet and map side-by-side. Having it clear when you're actually in [Bloggsville] helps me place the next instruction more accurately. This might also apply for anyone trying to follow the route on a paper map, for much the same reason.