Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

Return to index: [Subject] [Thread] [Date] [Author]

Re: OC Dinner Meeting - March, 1998

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Bill Allen wrote:

<<  The episode makes a very clear point about the quality of written
      documents. No matter how well a document may be written (in the
      opinion of the author), its true test comes on how well it is
      perceived by the reader(s). Believe me, I know this first hand :o).
      Hypothetically, if a building code provision is written "well",
      then the intent of the provision will be correctly interpreted by
      the average person applying this code provision in their design. I
      am not going to debate the exact code provision for I have not
      spent nearly as much time studying the 1997 UBC as Mr. Lo (who
      admits he is not thoroughly comfortable with it yet) nor am I going
      to debate on who was right from a technical aspect. My point is
      that Mr. Bachman has missed the message in that the code provision
      is not well written if someone who has been designing tilt-up walls
      for 20 years has a difficult time interpreting it. What about the
      rest of us?>>

Bill.

Next time you attend a dinner meeting, could you stand up and identify
yourself.  You have become so famous on the List Server, I think a lot of us
would like to see what you look like.

I'm amazed that I'm in agreement with you on anything, but I am definitely in
agreement about the increasing difficulty in interpreting codes.  If I read
the audience correctly, I would say that most of them were sympathetic to Mr.
Lo on the short "debate" which occurred.

I think one of the side benefits of the development of the International
Building Code will be that the other two code writing groups (SBCCI and BOCA)
seem to be more practical-oriented and may slow down the West's tendency to
overwrite the code provisions.

Carl S. : - )