Talk:Concurrency (road)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Another term (possibly very obscure) - "lapping" [1] --SPUI (T - C) 19:10, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Move to overlap (road)?

In my (admittedly limited) studies, I have encountered the word "overlap" more than "concurrency". This word is also easier to conjugate - you can say that Routes 1 and 2 overlap, but saying they concur sounds wrong, and usually on Wikipedia I see "runs concurrent with". --NE2 15:23, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Avoiding the terminology "Multiplex"

As per WP:NEO I have tried to reword articles to avoid the term "multiplex" wherever possible, since it's a neologism that's really only used by the road geek community; in fact the word "multiplex" is often linked to this article, as if it is expected that the reader may not understand the term. It's often used somewhat sloppily too, inconsistently used in such different forms as "multiplexes", "has a multiplex with", "is multiplexed"; when it's much easier and more natural to just say "overlaps", "runs concurrently with", "joins", etc. Certainly the neologism should be explained on this page, but I think the term should be avoided everywhere else in favor of "concurrency" or "overlap". Krimpet 22:48, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Other Terms

Concurrency is not the only term used by state road departments and the like, however. For example, I believe the technical term in California is shared alignment (although considering Caltrans'--and the legislature's?--apparent disdain for giving two or more numbers to a road, I'm surprised there's any official term at all). In Oregon, ODOT uses the term common with, which sounds like an informal marriage arrangement.^[1]

No wonder roadgeeks prefer the term multiplex. 4.243.206.19 05:54, 7 April 2007 (UTC)