I am a manager of construction information, tools and people .
I believe that hands-on manipulating of project information by all project participants is the key to achieving any meaningful improvement of the AEC industry operating within the post-gambling-era.
I consider myself to be a model-based construction information practitioner (shortened to a ‘BIM- meddler’) rather than an ‘expert’ or even ‘specialist’.
Friday, May 6, 2011
Why NOT reason more visually?
A kind Scandinavian Archicad-expert posted a message on my blog:
.. and I read through it obligingly – adamant to suspend my cynicism and find the really useful in the document.
And it IS a useful document – see for yourself.
The Nordic countries have long been at the forefront at anything BIM.
But then, I love to read long complicated books and still I am not that good with long textual documents.
In fact some internal self-preservation mechanism tends to kick in when I confront my mind with anything that looks like a set of rules (or even a guide or manual) and helpfully takes my interest to something else.
As I read through the wise document of the large Norwegian building owner an old email-viral flashes up.
Can’t really recall it in detail but lists numerous witty sentences, all starting with a “why”.
So I go and search and find ‘a’ why list and muse over it for a while...
Then I return to the document I rudely abandoned previously and make the connection...
My interest in the “why”s is simple –I’ve been wondering subconsciously, why aren’t documents that are supposed to guide processes like designing-documenting buildings not more pictorial even animated?
Why NOT reason with more graphics, visually?
Some of the “Why”s I like:
Why are apartments so close together?
Why is abbreviation such a long word?
Why do we call something sent by car a shipment and something sent by ship a cargo? Why do we call them restrooms when no one goes there to rest?
Why is the time of day with the slowest traffic called rush hour?