Masterspec Alterix spec database soft...

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

Author Message Robert E. Woodburn, AIA, CSI, CCS, CCCA Senior Member Username: bob_woodburn Post Number: 68 Registered: 11-2010 Posted on Tuesday, May 06, 2014 - 03:11 pm:    Since Alterix was released a few months ago as Arcom's answer to SpecLink-E, has anyone had enough experience with it to venture an evaluation or comment? How do the two compare? Is Alterix really ready for use now, or should one wait a while longer before taking the plunge? Can edited MasterSpec office masters be imported easily into Alterix? Is it easy to import BIM materials data? Thanks! Alan Mays, AIA Senior Member Username: amays Post Number: 186 Registered: 02-2003 Posted on Tuesday, May 06, 2014 - 03:56 pm:    Didn't ARCOM try this once before? Lynx? I thought they tried the Q&A method and it totally failed? I looked at the web site and there is no mention of linking to BIM. Revit isn't even listed. No screen shots that you can read. If I was looking for what you are asking Robert from the web sites of each, I would pick either Speclink or eSpec this right off the bat. Robert E. Woodburn, AIA, CSI, CCS, CCCA Senior Member Username: bob_woodburn Post Number: 69 Registered: 11-2010 Posted on Tuesday, May 06, 2014 - 05:10 pm:    Thanks, Alan. Yes, I believe MasterSpec has tried at least three times to overcome the inherent disadvantages of a text-based system (with Lynx, Q&A, and a joint venture with e-specs). None of those seemed to live up to their promise. I'm hoping that Alterix will be different... I am a longtime user (and fan) of SpecLink at previous firms, but the firm I currently work for will need to import its various MasterSpec-based office masters to a database system. I suspect that Alterix might be a better way to do that, if it would minimize re-keying of a substantial amount of text. I don't know whether linkage to BIM will be required, but migrating masters will. Phil Kabza Senior Member Username: phil_kabza Post Number: 538 Registered: 12-2002 Posted on Wednesday, May 07, 2014 - 06:27 pm:    I've been using LINX since 2000 to preedit spec sections for a wide array of projects. For complex sections, it's a very fast 80 or 90 percent editor. The interface has always been a bit old fashioned, and it has had its quirks. But it's been great, especially for sections like the painting sections or tiling, where the systems and methods are many and project-specific. I understand Altarix will replace LINX, but hopefully not before Altarix functions exceed what LINX has done up to now. It appears it will be a superior method of maintaining office masters. I'm not sure what you mean by "importing BIM materials data," Robert. If you're referring to creating a CoBIE-like environment for cataloging project product data, that's not what Altarix does. That has to be handled during the construction phase anyway. It seems to still be more pointed at construction specifications than at facility management processes. Robert E. Woodburn, AIA, CSI, CCS, CCCA Senior Member Username: bob_woodburn Post Number: 70 Registered: 11-2010 Posted on Wednesday, May 07, 2014 - 06:55 pm:    By "importing BIM materials data" I was referring to an ability to extract a list of materials from the model, perhaps also generate a TOC, and maybe even pre-edit the sections automatically according to what the model shows. SpecLink-E can do some if not all of this through the accessory program LinkMan-E, but I wonder whether it is very adept at importing complete pre-edited MasterSpec sections, where I suspect Alterix would be better. Phil Kabza Senior Member Username: phil_kabza Post Number: 540 Registered: 12-2002 Posted on Wednesday, May 14, 2014 - 09:35 pm:    I'd be interested in hearing about the success of a process such as what Robert describes. I expect there are some project teams who have the capability of creating graphic input plus accurate material characteristic identification. Many design teams have limited ability to identify products and rough edit specifications without support from someone who is more specification-adept or is a dedicated specifier. For those teams, does the BIM materials data approach still offer advantages, or is it more effective and efficient to separate the graphic input process from the written specification process? Scott McIntosh-Mize Senior Member Username: scott_mize_ccs_csi Post Number: 94 Registered: 02-2009 Posted on Tuesday, May 20, 2014 - 11:07 am:    Mr. Woodburn, my $.02: (Yes, I work for BSD, but would remiss if I didn't chime in. I wrote specifications full-time for an architecture firm for 15 years in my previous life, so I'm well acquainted with the pains of maintaining and updating an office master specification.) The current version of SpecLink (SL-E) allows you to import MSWord and RTF files directly into the database. Assuming a given section is already more or less what you want it to be, reformatting or re-keying text should be minimal. You'd then have to add any linking you wanted, but you'd have to do that anyway in whatever system into which you import your employer's office masters. Plus, SL-E's user-added link feature is drag-and-drop. Once that work is done, and is part of your office master, it can be re-used indefinitely. From your comments, you're already aware of BSD's LinkMan software, so I won't beat that drum. Whichever way you go, I wish you the best of luck. Robert E. Woodburn, AIA, CSI, CCS, CCCA Senior Member Username: bob_woodburn Post Number: 76 Registered: 11-2010 Posted on Tuesday, May 20, 2014 - 11:26 am:    Thanks, Scott. (I've used BSD's SpecLink+ for years and liked it a lot, only upgrading to SpecLink-E recently when the older version was phased out.) I suspect the real problem with importing an existing MS Word-based section into either Altarix or SpecLink-E would be that it all becomes essentially user-generated text, would render automatic updating useless, since it's not part of the master daltabase. To simplify updating, even though it would be more work up front, it would seem better to re-edit one or the other master guide database from scratch, limiting edits to preserve intact as much as possible of the master data. Does that make sense? Sheldon Wolfe Senior Member Username: sheldon_wolfe Post Number: 760 Registered: 01-2003 Posted on Tuesday, May 20, 2014 - 12:32 pm:    There's another real problem if your specs are based on MasterSpec. You don't own your own masters. Scott McIntosh-Mize Senior Member Username: scott_mize_ccs_csi Post Number: 95 Registered: 02-2009 Posted on Wednesday, May 28, 2014 - 02:46 pm:    You're more-or-less correct, Mr. Woodburn. BSD promises (for obvious reasons) that the automatic updating will not alter or overwrite user-added content. You do lose the automatic updating feature, but I've heard from subscribers who use their own user-imported office masters inside the SLE database that they periodically compare the SLE master sections to their office masters and manually update as needed. (Sounds tedious, I know; but they seem to be happy with it.) As I mentioned earlier, it's easy to make user-added links - not just between your user added sections, but between user-added sections and the master database. The Tables of Contents and the Reference Standards section are examples of master sections to which users often link their user-added sections. After the initial investment to add the linking to your imported office masters, the only thing you'd really be missing is the automatic updating, and the reported experience of other subscribers is that the updating is manageable. Clear as mud? Robert E. Woodburn, AIA, CSI, CCS, CCCA Senior Member Username: bob_woodburn Post Number: 80 Registered: 11-2010 Posted on Wednesday, May 28, 2014 - 03:15 pm:    Scott, do you know what the best way to maintain parallel masters for a series of clients (e.g., school districts) would be in SpecLink? I'm guessing that if, instead of developing a separate client-specific master for each client, each client-specific paragraph were linked to a client's name (perhaps in a section modified for that purpose), then there could be just one master that could be customized to any particular client at the click of a mouse. It would require lots of custom linking to set that up, but when that was all done, the automatic updates would be applied simultaneously to all the master paragraphs underlying all the client master versions, keeping them all up to date. (Only new "from-scratch" added paragraphs would not be automatically updated that way.) Do I understand this correctly? Of course, this is a different approach from importing whole MS Word sections---and probably a LOT more trouble---but it might be worth the extra effort if it would help manage a multitude of client-specific masters. Has anyone used this approach, or a similar one? Scott McIntosh-Mize Senior Member Username: scott_mize_ccs_csi Post Number: 96 Registered: 02-2009 Posted on Friday, May 30, 2014 - 10:48 am:    Mr. Woodburn, The short answer to your question is "no". I'm not sure I know the "best" way to do *anything* :-) Everything that follows requires a disclaimer: While I did write project specifications and maintain office masters at an architecture firm for 15 years, I never had the privelege of working in SpecLink until I came to BSD. While I am expert in SLE's various features and functions, I have not used SLE to produce project specifications in "the real world". Also, our Support Department is your best bet for a fast, accurate answer on how to do something in SLE. Scott McIntosh-Mize Senior Member Username: scott_mize_ccs_csi Post Number: 97 Registered: 02-2009 Posted on Friday, May 30, 2014 - 10:51 am:    All that said, it's true that the master data underlying a user-*modified* paragraph is automatically updated - and SLE has an option that allows the user to accept/reject individual updates. You are also correct to say that only user-*added*, "from-scratch" paragraphs are independent of the automatic update process. There are a number of ways you could manage "parallel", client-specific master paragraphs within a single office master: SLE allows the user to define new tags, and you could add a user-defined tag to each set of client-specific paragraphs, and use the reporting feature to manage them. SLE also allows the user to define global terms; i.e., terms that appear throughout the project manual (like "Owner" or "Architect"). Once defined, and added to the appropriate paragraphs, the global term can be changed throughout the database by entering it once in the "Project Information" window. Finally, user-added linking is probably going to be the most powerful and flexible way to do what you propose. I see at least two possible approaches: One, a user-created section (somewhere in Division 00, perhaps) that identifies the options and has links to every affected paragraph in the database. Pro: all the links are in one place. Con: Complicated. Two, a user-created section (somewhere in Division 00, perhaps) that links to a user-added optional checklist at the top of each affected section. The section-specific checklist options would then be linked in turn to the affected paragraphs within the section. Pro: Spreads the linking work across many sections. This would give you the opportunity to test, refine, and use your approach before having it globally complete. Con: Linking *not* all in one place. I hope this has been helpful to you. Feel free to contact BSD, or me, directly. Richard Gonser AIA CSI CCCA SCIP Senior Member Username: rich_gonser Post Number: 66 Registered: 11-2008 Posted on Friday, May 30, 2014 - 11:41 am:    As a SpecLink user, I use similar ideas to what Scott has been relaying. Doing this linking has been important when I deal the private versus public school/hospital projects here in the socialist state of California. Examples are also, LEED versus CHPS versus HPI versus Green Code. As you well know these are very different scopes. The concept is to modify the master paragraph with the revised language; inserting your choices and/or deletions based upon the selected master "switch" at the non-printing top of the section. I also place historical notes in project notes tab to tell me 18 months from now why a particular client doesn't want a vendor in that section. The difficulty is setting up those links. But it is well worth it! Let me add that, I heard from the guy who ran Disney's specs, they use Scott's option number 2 and are very happy with it on an international level. That works for a variety of project from their studios, to Anaheim, Orlando, Tokyo, Paris, and Bejing. Robert E. Woodburn, AIA, CSI, CCS, CCCA Senior Member Username: bob_woodburn Post Number: 82 Registered: 11-2010 Posted on Friday, May 30, 2014 - 01:35 pm:    Thanks, Scott and Richard. It looks as if we may benefit from doing something like this (despite all the complicated linking involved), since our client base (largely school districts and healthcare entities) tends to have very distinct--and sometimes detailed--preferences. Scott McIntosh-Mize Senior Member Username: scott_mize_ccs_csi Post Number: 98 Registered: 02-2009 Posted on Friday, May 30, 2014 - 02:33 pm:    You're very welcome, Mr. Woodburn. If I was at all helpful, I am content. Thanks also for your input, Mr. Gonser. It's good to know that I'm on the right track. Robert E. Woodburn, AIA, CSI, CCS, CCCA Senior Member Username: bob_woodburn Post Number: 83 Registered: 11-2010 Posted on Friday, May 30, 2014 - 02:51 pm:    Likely our next step is to study exactly what's available in Alterix and SpecLink--and what's not--and do a detailed comparison of their features and benefits, to see whether and how we could accomplish what we need in each, and how hard that might be. (Unless such a comparison is already underway...is anyone out there doing this?) Alan Mays, AIA Senior Member Username: amays Post Number: 194 Registered: 02-2003 Posted on Friday, May 30, 2014 - 03:02 pm:    Good luck. Their website doesn't offer much. No screen shots, etc. It is all sales pitch verbage. For us, we decided on BSD Speclink about 2 years ago. The specifiers have yet to complain and have adapted when needed. Sheldon Wolfe Senior Member Username: sheldon_wolfe Post Number: 771 Registered: 01-2003 Posted on Saturday, May 31, 2014 - 10:38 am:    The problem with all software is that you can't really know how it works until you use it for some time. For simple programs, that time might be very short, but for others, such as these, it will be much longer. If you gave a couple of people nothing else to do but beat these programs to death, you probably could get a reasonable comparison in a few days. Most companies won't dedicate that time, though, and casual use won't reveal all the quirks for a long time, perhaps weeks. By then, the investment is so large that a company won't consider another program. user (Unregistered Guest) Unregistered guest Posted on Thursday, June 15, 2017 - 08:00 pm:    Recently SpecLink-E has been deleting paragraphs without any action by user. On a recent project, two paragraphs (and who knows how many other paragraphs) were deleted while importing sections from a previous project to start a new project. Has anyone else experienced this issue? Dewayne Dean Senior Member Username: ddean Post Number: 134 Registered: 02-2016 Posted on Friday, June 16, 2017 - 12:58 pm:    Have you talked to SpecLink support about this? user (Unregistered Guest) Unregistered guest Posted on Friday, June 16, 2017 - 02:32 pm:    Yes, for the last 9 days. Technical support response is their standard boiler plate. Have uploaded 9 MB backup file and all log files. Technical support doesn't believe that their update process can cause this, but it happened. Sent screen shot to illustrate the change. Has anyone else had this problem? Dewayne Dean Senior Member Username: ddean Post Number: 135 Registered: 02-2016 Posted on Friday, June 16, 2017 - 05:05 pm:    I use SpecLink every day. Have not noticed the problem, but who knows if it has been going on. I don't usually import sections though. I copy the previous project and then edit as needed. user (Unregistered Guest) Unregistered guest Posted on Tuesday, June 27, 2017 - 10:18 am:    Mr. Dean, are we the only two folks reading this forum who use SpecLink-E? After 12 days back and forth, we might be closer to an answer. However, users will not like what we have uncovered. SpecLink-E has a built-in automatic update process that deletes / revises non-user paragraphs from master sections and from YOUR office masters. Here is data copied from log file: "Importing section from project 'office master': Section Id= 142400, Doc Id= 3985, Division= 14, Source Project Id= 200, Is User Created= False, Author= BSD, Last Changed= 7/27/2016" Checking for SLEClient_Trace file - there is not one. No one logged into SpecLink-E on 7/27/2016. The last time I logged into office master to accept, reject, or convert red-marked paragraphs was in May 2016. Dewayne Dean Senior Member Username: ddean Post Number: 136 Registered: 02-2016 Posted on Tuesday, June 27, 2017 - 11:46 am:    user, There are a few other SpecLink users on the forum, not sure why none of them have weighed in here.