Spec Formatting

Log Out | Topics | Search Moderators | Register | Edit Profile

Author Message Scott L. (Unregistered Guest) Unregistered guest Posted on Tuesday, February 24, 2015 - 02:54 pm:    Hey everyone! Spec writing newbie here .I have recently started helping with the spec writing portion of in-house design projects at a large government agency. It seems like we have several inefficiencies with the process and I was hoping I could get some feedback from you all on best practices. The first problem I would like to improve is file formatting and organization. Currently there is a "standard spec" folder that has all of the spec's that have been approved and used in the past that are worth keeping. Each is a Microsoft Word document and was taken from a different project and naturally has slightly different formatting. The process for writing a spec for a new project is to copy and paste the sections that are relevant and then edit them to fit the project. Naturally this creates a formatting nightmare for Word. Please feel free to comment on the above process and also the specific questions below: How do you save and organize standard spec files? How do you effectively use Word's styles to format the document? (In general terms, I am pretty handy with the technical aspects of Word) Do you create 1 Word document for the project spec or do you keep them as separate files for each section? Thanks! -Scott J. Peter Jordan Senior Member Username: jpjordan Post Number: 801 Registered: 05-2004 Posted on Wednesday, February 25, 2015 - 07:21 am:    There was a previous thread that may be helpful. Sheldon Wolfe Senior Member Username: sheldon_wolfe Post Number: 839 Registered: 01-2003 Posted on Wednesday, February 25, 2015 - 08:09 am:    One directory per MF Division, e.g., Div 00, Div 01, etc. Create a template with the margins, font, and styles you want to use. Use automatic numbering. Assign a hotkey combination to each style, e.g., ctrl-shift-1, ctrl-shift-2, to each style. Attach each section to the template. Adjust margins (this part is not automatic). Apply styles to each paragraph. If existing files do not have automatic numbering, you'll have to delete existing addressing. Using hotkeys, you should be able to reformat a section in just a few minutes. See "SpecProcessor!" www.northstarcsi.com/GUIBytes/gui0205-specprocessor01.htm. It was written for pre-ribbon Word, but the basic idea is there. The last part of the series talks about using a separate file to contain common information, such as issue date, project number and title, etc. As Peter notes, there was an old thread here that discussed this subject, maybe more than one. As I recall, the consensus was to use one file per section, rather than a single file containing all sections. That makes it easier to control page numbering, easier to add or delete sections, and easier to deal with modifications. Scott L. (Unregistered Guest) Unregistered guest Posted on Wednesday, February 25, 2015 - 09:57 am:    Thanks guys. I had a suspicion that keeping each section in the project spec separate was the way to go. It makes it so much easier to collaborate or edit and small inconsistencies in formatting don't become such a large problem. Thanks for the link to the article. If you find the previous thread referenced by Peter, please post it here. I've done some searching but haven't found it yet. Thanks again! J. Peter Jordan Senior Member Username: jpjordan Post Number: 802 Registered: 05-2004 Posted on Wednesday, February 25, 2015 - 10:47 am:    I found two threads you should look at: http://discus.4specs.com/discus/messages/2195/47.html (2000 - 2005) http://discus.4specs.com/discus/messages/430/671.html (2003 - 2008) And one other that you should probably revisit: http://discus.4specs.com/discus/messages/2195/1291.html (Not exactly on point, but worth thinking about) I would do everything you can to see if you can get your organization to subscribe to MasterSpec (or SpecLink). This would give you resources to create current specs and update the ones you have. A subscription to MasterSpec also gives you tool to edit your specs and manage your files. I would say that you could easility realize a savings in much less than a year with the tools to change headers and footers. I do want to emphasize the importance of using syles and templates to make your job easier. I would hazard a guess that there are still specifiers around who are manually renumbering paragraphs in their specs because they don't want to deal with the automatic paragraph numbering that comes with styles. Scott L. (Unregistered Guest) Unregistered guest Posted on Wednesday, February 25, 2015 - 02:05 pm:    Thanks Peter. The last link was refreshing to read. Amy C. Kilburn, AIA, CSI, CCS, LEED AP Intermediate Member Username: ackarch Post Number: 4 Registered: 11-2009 Posted on Friday, February 27, 2015 - 12:40 pm:    Scott: Yes to everything that Sheldon & Peter recommend. And please use the MasterFormat 2004/2010 6-digit numbering system. The previous 5-digit system isn't being supported by the industry anymore. In the last 5 years, I've written specs for too many projects here in DC that required use of the gov't agency's database which is oriented on a 5-digit system. Are you a CSI member? There's so much support here, whether at National level or in your local Chapter (i.e. you're not alone!) Good luck - and keep us posted. Amy C. Kilburn, AIA, CSI, CCS, LEED AP Dave Metzger Senior Member Username: davemetzger Post Number: 563 Registered: 07-2001 Posted on Friday, February 27, 2015 - 12:53 pm:    Amy, At least the DC government has changed to the 5-digit numbering system. I had specified a project for them in the mid-1990's and they were still using the old 2-digit alphanumeric system. Jerome J. Lazar, RA, CCS, CSI, SCIP Senior Member Username: lazarcitec Post Number: 1268 Registered: 05-2003 Posted on Friday, February 27, 2015 - 12:58 pm:    Scott, I disagree with those that say the 5 digit format is dead, perhaps for public sector work that is true....but for the private sector it is very much alive and kicking and preferred by many construction professionals to the chagrin of many on this board. Live long and prosper, Scott. RIP Leonard Amy C. Kilburn, AIA, CSI, CCS, LEED AP Advanced Member Username: ackarch Post Number: 5 Registered: 11-2009 Posted on Friday, February 27, 2015 - 01:04 pm:    Jerome: I understand that much of the industry hasn't adopted the 6-digit system. However, for a government agency, probably nationally-reaching (and possibly international, too), the buildings are far too large & complicated to be supported by the 16-division, 5-digit system. MF/04-10 furnishes appropriate structure for everything! Amy C. Kilburn, AIA, CSI, CCS, LEED AP Jerome J. Lazar, RA, CCS, CSI, SCIP Senior Member Username: lazarcitec Post Number: 1269 Registered: 05-2003 Posted on Friday, February 27, 2015 - 01:11 pm:    Amy, I agree with you on Public work, I don't know why you had to restate your case with another post in support of MF04, but I disagree about complexity, I am preparing specs in the 5 digit format for a 52 story ultra luxury multi-family project, all it takes is a little more creativity and some commonsense, which most specwriters have.