Not sure if this can be considered good news for the
BIM-minded operating in the region.
Only a couple of days ago I stated in this blog, that
sticking to-and improving a wobbly-but functioning-FlatCAD system often makes
more sense than jumping half-heartedly into BIM.
It felt great publishing that thought publically, BTW - I
once lost my job over saying something similar.
Doggedly sticking to the theory that the only way BIM can
be successfully implemented is by going ‘cold-turkey’ on CAD did not help my
prospects of lasting in the said position, of the
BIM-software-vendor-consultancy, but that is another story.
So, I’ve been reading with some interest the specification
that CAD files provided as part of future building permits and as-built drawings
will need to comply with.
All reasonably easy to follow, technically not challenging,
yet, still a major step in the wrong direction, I believe.
The last 2 decades of CAD existing within the official framework,
yet contractually non-binding has kept the doors open for changes to be made for
the better.
For FlatCAD to be leaving these murky waters for officially
endorsed ‘standards’ solidifies something that the industry should have left behind
by now.
In fact, my hunch is that making these CAD standards work
across the board (in one city alone) will be difficult, might as well go cold-turkey
and BIM.
somewhere i have never traveled, gladly beyond any experience, your eyes have their silence; in your most frail gesture are things which enclose me, or which i cannot touch because they are too near.
ReplyDeleteThis article is full of excellent informative content. The points you make are interesting and original, and I agree on many of them. Thank you for writing on this topic.
ReplyDeletepsi
THANK U FOR THE POST
ReplyDeleteFOR MORE INFORMATION CLICK HERE
autocad solutions IN USA