In article , (Dave Arquati) wrote:

I think this pedantic argument has been done to death on this
newsgroup.

I did acknowledge that I was being pedantic.

If you're going to split hairs over the type of stock,
first recognise the difference between "tube" and "Tube". The former
may be taken to mean just trains using the bored deep tube lines (if
you wish to be so pedantic about it). The latter refers to the London
Underground system.

A distinction which escapes me - perhaps I am not so pedantic after all!


--
Peter Beale

Peter Beale wrote:
In article , (Dave Arquati) wrote:


I think this pedantic argument has been done to death on this
newsgroup.

I did acknowledge that I was being pedantic.

The point was that your pedantry was incorrect.

If you're going to split hairs over the type of stock,
first recognise the difference between "tube" and "Tube". The former
may be taken to mean just trains using the bored deep tube lines (if
you wish to be so pedantic about it). The latter refers to the London
Underground system.

A distinction which escapes me - perhaps I am not so pedantic after all!

London Underground = "Tube" = deep bored + subsurface lines
Deep bored lines = "tube" lines.

Line which used to serve Watford Junction = Bakerloo = a tube line.
Line which serves Watford station, operated by LU = a Tube line.

See www.thetube.com.

Personally, I don't care if someone uses "tube" (capitalised or
otherwise) to describe any LU-operated line. It's widely accepted usage.
However, I make an effort to distinguish "Tube" and "tube" because I
know there are pedants about...

--
Dave Arquati
Imperial College, SW7
www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London