Revisions to Specifications

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

Author Message Jerome J. Lazar, RA, CCS, CSI, SCIP Senior Member Username: lazarcitec Post Number: 940 Registered: 05-2003 Posted on Friday, November 02, 2012 - 02:17 am:    How do my specwriting colleagues identify revisions on specifications that have been issued. Do you cloud? Strikeover? Shade? Underline? I have a client who expects me to cloud the revision and number them like he does on his drawings. Comments please? Sheldon Wolfe Senior Member Username: sheldon_wolfe Post Number: 595 Registered: 01-2003 Posted on Friday, November 02, 2012 - 02:21 am:    I use track changes, so I get redline underline and strikethrough. At the end of each change, I insert the addendum number in square brackets. Works well. Clouding could get messy in text. Nathan Woods, CSI, CCCA, LEED AP Senior Member Username: nwoods Post Number: 490 Registered: 08-2005 Posted on Friday, November 02, 2012 - 03:39 am:    Bold for new, strike through for old. Rev number and date in footer Nathan Woods, CSI, CCCA, LEED AP Senior Member Username: nwoods Post Number: 491 Registered: 08-2005 Posted on Friday, November 02, 2012 - 03:41 am:    Also, updated TOC with publication dates of each section. The revised sections have the updated dates in bold John McGrann Senior Member Username: jmcgrann Post Number: 96 Registered: 03-2002 Posted on Friday, November 02, 2012 - 08:24 am:    Like Nathan, track changes, with an issue date and description in the document footer and a corresponding Table of Contents indicating the latest issue date for each document or section. For subsequent issues of previously revised documents the previous track change annotations are removed by “accepting all” so that only changes for the particular issue are indicated. Where all changes have to be indicated (say republishing a project manual to incorporate all prior addenda and negotiated changes for final contract) I’ll use track changes for everything but also use the endnotes function to provide a notation of the origination of each change. John T. McGrann, Jr., AIA, CSI, CCS, LEED AP Ronald L. Geren, AIA, CSI, CCS, CCCA, SCIP Senior Member Username: specman Post Number: 1060 Registered: 03-2003 Posted on Friday, November 02, 2012 - 10:39 am:    Tracked changes with a revised issue date. Previous changes are incorporated into the text so only the most recent changes are highlighted. Ron Geren, AIA, CSI, CCS, CCCA, SCIP www.specsandcodes.com Robert W. Johnson Senior Member Username: robert_w_johnson Post Number: 221 Registered: 03-2009 Posted on Friday, November 02, 2012 - 10:50 am:    Ditto Ron. Also note on TOC. Richard L Matteo, AIA, CSI, CCS Senior Member Username: rlmat Post Number: 553 Registered: 10-2003 Posted on Friday, November 02, 2012 - 11:56 am:    I like Nathan's Bold for new, strike through for old. Rev number and date in footer. I've used this method with success. Track Changes can be messy, especially if there are already underlined items in spec that are not changing. Clouding is at best difficult in electronic form and also can renser some text illegible. Shading can also result in illegible text. Strikeout and bold make it very clear asto what changed. Wayne Yancey Senior Member Username: wayne_yancey Post Number: 548 Registered: 01-2008 Posted on Friday, November 02, 2012 - 12:15 pm:    I agree with Sheldon, Ron and Bob above We avoid the auto "track changes" features of MSWord. Deletions shown with manual strikethrough. New text shown with manual underline (Ctrl+U). Both additions and deletions flanked in the right margin with the method for issuing the change: [CCD1] or [ASI1]or [CO1] or [AD1] as noted by Sheldon. Rev number with issued date in footer at left margin Original issue and subsequent issues archived for an audit trail. Entire revised section reissued. TOC kept current as noted by Bob. Previous changes are incorporated into the text so only the most recent changes are highlighted as noted by Ron. I avoid narratives in Addendum cover page. File name suffixed with trail of change cover acronyms without dates. G. Wade Bevier, FCSI, CCS, LEED-AP BD+C, SCIPa, USGBC Senior Member Username: wbevier Post Number: 40 Registered: 07-2004 Posted on Friday, November 02, 2012 - 12:23 pm:    I use track changes throughout but these are usually hidden in the published document. For revisions to published sections I underline new text and strikeout text being removed. I then add a double line in the margin (border tool) to indicate where a change has taken place so it can be easily found by the end user (Contractor) when it is issued. For sections that get revised more than once (not recommended but it does happen) I remove the double line from any previous revisions and only include the indicator to show where the changes actually took place for the individual submittal being published. I include the date and revision title in the header of the revised section per our in-house formating standards. I also keep a running TOC with the date and a title after the section title for each revision indicating when it took place. Steven Bruneel, AIA, CSI-CDT, LEED-AP, EDAC Senior Member Username: redseca2 Post Number: 377 Registered: 12-2006 Posted on Friday, November 02, 2012 - 03:30 pm:    Ditto - Bold for new, strike out for old, with or without track changes. We have a project that wanted the bubbles in the spec text, but we talked that one back. But we do need to use the same delta symbol (triangle with the revision number inside) that is used on the drawings in the left page margin no matter how messy this can get with formatting. That is a new chore, creating the delta symbol graphic and sending it to all spec providing consultants. James M. Sandoz, AIA, CSI, CCS, CCCA, LEED AP Senior Member Username: jsandoz Post Number: 124 Registered: 06-2005 Posted on Monday, November 05, 2012 - 09:11 am:    I use the same method as Richard and Steven (pseudo-track changes). I find true track changes to be cumbersome. In subsequent re-issues of specifications (no, one revision is not always enough :-) the writer has to be careful to delete all previously struck-through text and "un-underline" all previously added text. A macro to find struck-through and underlined text can be helpful. J. Peter Jordan Senior Member Username: jpjordan Post Number: 516 Registered: 05-2004 Posted on Monday, November 05, 2012 - 10:00 am:    I have not had any problems with Word's "Track Changes" feature. I used strikethrough for deleted text and italics for added text. It updates the paragarph numbering and puts a bar out at the side to indicate that there has been a change (even if it is a renumbering change). This can be modified by the user within certain limits for office practice. If I have to change a section more than once, I update the section, accepting all the changes (can be done as a single operation), and then make more changes. This is analogous to deleting the clouds from previous changes. Don't know what I would do if I had to put in the delta numbers although a response of "Are you daft" might be appropriate followed by a request for additional services. What I have done is change the footer to track when the specification was reissued. Because I am an independent, it is difficult for me to do document tracking for the entire project, and I usually push that back on my client (the architect). Robin E. Snyder Senior Member Username: robin Post Number: 438 Registered: 08-2004 Posted on Monday, November 05, 2012 - 10:26 am:    I take a similar approach to Peter - i use track changes with not problem. I find it is easier to underline added text (rather than bold) because it stands out better (IMO). I then use the TOC as a running tally to show whether a sections is "revised", "new" or "deleted" on any given revision. Robert W. Johnson Senior Member Username: robert_w_johnson Post Number: 222 Registered: 03-2009 Posted on Monday, November 05, 2012 - 11:03 am:    Ditto Ron, Peter and Robin. I do not find Track Changes messy (do not underline any regular text) or cumbersome - by contrast it makes it easy with minimum manual work. Why create work for yourself? Modify file name, turn Track Changes on and make changes, turn it off and modify footer issue info. Use Track changes to note revisions in TOC with modified file name and revised footer issue info. Second changes to same file - modify file name again, turn Track Changes on and accept previous changes (one key stroke), make new changes, turn it off and modify footer issue info. Follow same routine in TOC (file name modification, turn Track Changes on, accept previous changes, then note new revisions, turn Track Changes off and modify footer issue info). Keep historic files for information on what changes were made at various issues. TOC includes revision history. Jerome J. Lazar, RA, CCS, CSI, SCIP Senior Member Username: lazarcitec Post Number: 946 Registered: 05-2003 Posted on Monday, November 05, 2012 - 11:03 am:    Great comments except I use Wordperfect. J. Peter Jordan Senior Member Username: jpjordan Post Number: 518 Registered: 05-2004 Posted on Monday, November 05, 2012 - 11:39 am:    I use the Word document to create PDF files. I keep the multiple PDFs, but a single Word document which keeps changing. Sheldon Wolfe Senior Member Username: sheldon_wolfe Post Number: 596 Registered: 01-2003 Posted on Monday, November 05, 2012 - 12:53 pm:    Same here, Peter. A big advantage is realized when you have a client that wants a final set of documents that incorporates all changes. Some of our clients want that set to be the final version, with no indication of when the changes occurred, others want them to show. Either way, track changes makes it easy. I edit the specifications first, then write the addendum or other modification document. Describing the change first, outside of the section, sometimes results in a surprise when the section is updated - it doesn't read the way you thought it would. ken hercenberg Senior Member Username: khercenberg Post Number: 366 Registered: 12-2006 Posted on Monday, November 05, 2012 - 02:05 pm:    Ditto on the Track Changes in Word. I change the file name with an embedded date so when I accept changes in the newest document I can always go back to a previous version if needed. Sheldon, like you I like keeping a running tally in the Addendum narratives. Since I can rarely get anyone else to proofread content, the narrative is my best opportunity to be my own 'second set of eyes'. Lynn Javoroski FCSI CCS LEED® AP SCIP Affiliate Senior Member Username: lynn_javoroski Post Number: 1579 Registered: 07-2002 Posted on Tuesday, November 06, 2012 - 02:18 pm:    We do pretty much the same as Wayne stated above, except we add nothing in the margins. Our "current" folder is just that - the most current version of the section. We PDF sections for whatever the issuance is as a permanent record of what was done. Because there are 4 of us in the firm, and "track changes" appearance can be set individually, we decided to use manual features to achieve the same appearance. I use the "find" feature of Word (Format or Special) to find instances of underlining or strike-through before making new changes. It's easy enough. John Bunzick, CCS, CCCA, LEED AP Senior Member Username: bunzick Post Number: 1463 Registered: 03-2002 Posted on Tuesday, November 06, 2012 - 05:09 pm:    Like Sheldon, we used track changes with the addendum number in brackets. We also put the addendum number and date in the footer so you could see if you were looking at the latest version of a section. I like the idea of the addendum number immediately after the change because if later addenda affect the same page, you can see which changes were issued with which addenda. We also issued a matrix-type table of contents with each addendum. It had all project specs with a column for each addenda so you could always see which section was issued with each addendum. This format was also used for projects where not all sections were issued at the same time. J. Peter Jordan Senior Member Username: jpjordan Post Number: 519 Registered: 05-2004 Posted on Wednesday, November 07, 2012 - 10:14 am:    Lynn, unless you use color in other ways, you might trying to set up the track changes settings to have different colors, but same style (all italics for inserts, but user 1 is red, user two is blue etc.). When you print your PDFs you can set this for B&W output; color goes away, but the other stuff is still there. May not work, but might. Lynn Javoroski FCSI CCS LEED® AP SCIP Affiliate Senior Member Username: lynn_javoroski Post Number: 1580 Registered: 07-2002 Posted on Wednesday, November 07, 2012 - 01:42 pm:    Peter, that would take too much coordination and cooperation. And what happens when we share a word doc with a consultant? I shudder to think of the resulting confusion! Seriously, that's not a bad idea. John Bunzick, CCS, CCCA, LEED AP Senior Member Username: bunzick Post Number: 1467 Registered: 03-2002 Posted on Thursday, November 08, 2012 - 03:33 pm:    Peter, I'm sure that color assignments "travel" from one workstation to another, or if Word assigns them on-the-fly by user. Does anyone know? Lynn Javoroski FCSI CCS LEED® AP SCIP Affiliate Senior Member Username: lynn_javoroski Post Number: 1581 Registered: 07-2002 Posted on Thursday, November 08, 2012 - 04:06 pm:    I'm pretty sure each workstation person gets to choose what the particular options (color, line or no line). And I think you can also choose something like "automatic" or "by author" as well as how the changes will appear. David E Lorenzini Senior Member Username: deloren Post Number: 135 Registered: 04-2000 Posted on Thursday, November 08, 2012 - 08:37 pm:    When Word combines Track Changes from different authors, it assigns colors at random to differenciate authors. David Lorenzini, FCSI, CCS Architectural Resources Co. David Stutzman Senior Member Username: david_stutzman Post Number: 80 Registered: 07-2002 Posted on Saturday, November 10, 2012 - 09:50 am:    MS Word's track changes text markings are controlled by machine settings, and are not save with the individual files. If you must deliver Word files as we do for some clients, using track changes presents a problem because the machines will never be set the same. For these clients, we use macros to convert track changes to manual text markings of the client's choice - bold, underline, strike-through or what ever they want - before delivering the Word files. For our office we have a macro to set all machines identically. Then when we use track changes every machine produces the same result. We try to deliver specs in PDF so we control the look as they are published.