4specs.com    4specs.com Home Page

Revisions to Specifications Log Out | Topics | Search
Moderators | Register | Edit Profile

4specs Discussion Forum » Archive - Specifications Discussions #5 » Revisions to Specifications « Previous Next »

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:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

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:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

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:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

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:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

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:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

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:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

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:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

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:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

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:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

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:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

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:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

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:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

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:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

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:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

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:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

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:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

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:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

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:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

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:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

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:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

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:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

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:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

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:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

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:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

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:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

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:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

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:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

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.

Topics | Last Day | Last Week | Tree View | Search | Help/Instructions | Program Credits Administration