Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

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

RE: CODES: Electronic Version Should Be Provided

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Searchable electronic documents are very useful, but nothing will ever
replace paper for usability.  You can make notes, draw sketches, make
corrections, etc., in the margins.  Yes, I know you can also do that with
some electronic documents, but it's just not the same.

Also, (to me at least), it's just plain easier to read a book than a
computer screen.

If I were to purchase the 2003 IBC on a CD, the first thing I'd do is print
it double-sided on paper and stick it in a 3-ring binder (or maybe have
Kinko's do it).


---
Jason Kilgore
Leigh & O'Kane, LLC
Kansas City, Missouri
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bill Polhemus [mailto:bill(--nospam--at)polhemus.cc]
> Sent: Monday, September 27, 2004 10:46 AM
> To: seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org
> Subject: CODES: Electronic Version Should Be Provided
> 
> Regardless of whether or not one is required to purchase a copy of a
> design
> code or standard (building code, material-of-construction design standard,
> etc.) I believe that an electronic version of the document ought to be
> provided, preferably in a standard format such as Adobe Acrobat.
> 
> I say that for one very important reason: It gives one the ability to do
> text searches.
> 
> As codes and standards grow in complexity, the effort required to "keep
> up"
> with what they actually say also increases. Most standards do not have an
> adequate index provided. For example, I have found the index in the 2000
> International Residential Code to be almost worthless. The Table of
> Contents
> provides more relevant information when you are trying to find something
> in
> particular.
> 
> Even the most thoroughly indexed standard is going to miss something. And
> indexing doesn't necessarily help you find inconsistencies in the
> document.
> A searchable electronic version allows more relevant searches, and also
> may
> help uncover inconsistencies which (while I'm sure it would be a short-
> term
> PITA to the code-writing body) would help to stamp out bugs and possibly
> reduce the amount of errata required.
> 
> Anyway, my two cents' worth on a Monday morning still under the gun.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Bill Polhemus, P.E.
> Polhemus Engineering Company
> Katy, Texas, USA
> 



******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
*   Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp
* 
*   This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers 
*   Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To 
*   subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
*
*   http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
*
*   Questions to seaint-ad(--nospam--at)seaint.org. Remember, any email you 
*   send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted 
*   without your permission. Make sure you visit our web 
*   site at: http://www.seaint.org 
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********