WTF Lawyers

Without T bars yellow lines are just a bit of paint on the road. The law also serves to make sure councils reinstate yellow lines and other road markings after carriageway maintenance work.

So we're still going with this are we?

You've made very clear your position with regard to this, and I'm aware that that is how the law stands. But "the law is the law is the law" is not really a very informative or interesting argument. I am not arguing that the law should become arbitrary nor that we should simply ignore the law when it suits us. I am scared of a totalitarian state just as much as anyone else who doesn't own a tinfoil hat.

I am arguing that the law should change, exactly as laws always have. I am arguing that there should be introduced a clause, which allows the most trivial loopholes to be identified and ignored at the point of judgement, rather than later, and that this is done on the basis of how a reasonable person would interpret the situation on the ground. Lots of judgements are based on similar interpretation. For example (IANAlawyer etc.) in self-defence you are allowed to use "reasonable" force, so it has to be decided whether the force you used was reasonable or not.

With regard to speed limits, actually, the signage for that is also strictly regulated. 30 mph areas must have signs at each end, pavements and lamp posts at a particular distance. 40, 50 and 60 limits (not NSL) must have repeater signs at particular intervals, etc, or the road becomes an NSL.
Fair enough, that is a design requirement to make the speed limit clearly visible. Insufficient speed limit signs would be equivalent to a yellow line being faded or patchy due to wear, and I've already said that someone would not be expected to conform to a regulation that they cannot see. Arguing that a yellow line is not a yellow line because it is not terminated properly is like arguing that a speed limit sign is not a speed limit sign because the paint has faded a couple of pantone shades from the original colour.