Talk:Clock-face scheduling

I'm trying to translate the German article in a slightly condensed form. This might take a few days. In the meantime, feel free to fix typos or improve the style - my English isn't that good. --Kabelleger (talk) 23:18, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Also, I need some serious help with the terminology. Please fix it or tell me if I'm using the wrong terms. --Kabelleger (talk) 23:25, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

According to a native English speaker: Taktfahrplan -> regular timetable, Integraler Taktfahrplan -> integrated regular timetable, Umsteigeknoten -> hub or transport hub --Kabelleger (talk) 11:14, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Renaming to "Regular interval timetable"?

Please check the renaming to "Regular interval timetable" according to search-results in Google. Thank You! I am sorry, but my English is not so good.93.134.140.81 (talk) 09:14, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

TiffaF (talk) (see below) makes the following point, with which I agree:

"There is a subtle difference between "Clock-face timetable" and "regular interval timetable". I know of one line in the UK with a 40-minute interval. It is the branch line from Watford to St. Albans. It is single track, with no passing places and is operated by one train. It approximately 20 minutes from end-to-end, so the maximum frequency is one train every 45 minutes. This is a "regular interval timetable" but not a "clock-face timetable"."

I think the difference between "regular interval scheduling" and "clock-face scheduling" is that the latter must either involve regular intervals that can be multiplied by a whole number to make 60 (the number of minutes in an hour), or, perhaps, irregular intervals that otherwise regularly produce a service at the same number of minutes past each hour. For example, regular 4 minute intervals multiplied by 15 makes 60, and therefore produces trains/buses/whatever at the same number of minutes past the hour every hour. Similarly, regular 10 minute intervals is clock-face. Arguably, a train at 17, 24 and 49 minutes past each hour is also clock-face scheduling, although the intervals in that example are not regular. On the other hand, 40 must be multiplied by 1.5 to make 60, so it doesn't produce a clock-face service that arrives or departs at the same number of minutes past every hour. Bahnfrend (talk) 12:31, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

Renaming?

I happen to have had to do with the marketing communication of Swiss Federal Railways and Swiss Travel System since the introduction of the "Taktfahrplan", in 1982. We always had difficulties in translating "Taktfahrplan" or "horaire cadencé" in English. The term "Clock-face scheduling", especially the use of the word "clock-face" as a picture for the function behind the system, struck me as a brilliant idea when I first found it here. Clock-face Timetable" might be even better, I guess. Markus Seger, Head of Marketing communication at Swiss Federal Railway from 1980 till 1999 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.4.162.113 (talk) 21:05, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

I am a native speaker of English who speaks German as a second language. I have been familiar with the German language word Taktfahrplan since the mid-1980s, and, like Markus, had never seen a satisfactory English translation of Taktfahrplan until I found this article. I agree with Markus that Clock-face scheduling is a brilliant term. It also seems to be an expression that was not invented simply for Wikipedia - see, for example, this article, which was published in a UK-based newpaper before this article was created, and this discussion, published even earlier, as to how to translate the Italian expression orari cadenzati. As to whether "timetable" would be better than "scheduling" - my preference is for "scheduling", because it focuses attention on the operational concept, whereas "timetable" tends to direct one's attention to the printed piece of paper or its online equivalent, each of which is a product of the implementation of the concept. Bahnfrend (talk) 09:03, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

"timetable" is the British term corresponding to the German term "Fahrplan". "schedule" is the US term. Note the first reference (this article) is a British newspaper and uses "timetable". This is analoguous to the difference between Fahrschein and Billet (The German and Swiss terms for a rail ticket). TiffaF (talk) 10:45, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

I'm not British or American, so I can't comment on TiffaF's observation, other than to say that I don't disagree with it. However, what I was trying to indicate is that I believe that the gerund form (ie "scheduling" or "timetabling") is preferable to the noun form (ie "schedule" or "timetable"), because the former denotes an activity, process or operation, whereas the latter focuses attention on the printed or online table or list. As to which of "scheduling" or "timetabling" is preferable, I did a quick google search, which came up with 26.6 million hits for the former, and only 1.1 million results for the latter. That said, a redirect page named "Clock-face timetabling" would appear to be appropriate. Bahnfrend (talk) 12:02, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Clock-face scheduling. 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:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://ned.gschieder.ch/download/bahn/bahn.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131012013539/http://www.osaka-sandai.ac.jp/ce/rt/19xx/07/WCTR-070501j.pdf to http://www.osaka-sandai.ac.jp/ce/rt/19xx/07/WCTR-070501j.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110831030442/http://thinkmetric.com/pubs/itt/itt.pdf to http://thinkmetric.com/pubs/itt/itt.pdf

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:59, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

Stub

I noticed that the article is really short so I have placed the stub tag on it. I do not know how to get the italics on it so if anyone could help me that would be much appreciated. John Kryten (talk) 21:39, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

@John Kryten: The article is short but not a stub. WP:STUB explains what a stub is and it would be much shorter and less informative than this article. When stubs are labeled, we don't write the text out at the bottom but instead use a template: Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Stub types. ThaddeusSholto (talk) 21:43, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for the information I was a little confused because I have been reading Wikipedia for a long time and made a few edits as an IP address before creating my account and had often seen the text at the bottom of articles John Kryten (talk) 15:21, 8 February 2024 (UTC)