They heard there was a weird roof in the neighbourhood, so came to see for themselves. ;-)

These statements are getting more amusing by the minute. 1. “no comment”. 2. “pure speculation” 3. “we are committed to support him”. Treating all fans like we are 6 & hoping we are stupid. Have visions of the Social Media Admin going “do i gave to post this contradictory nonsense?” #WeStandWithTom

The article does point out that barcodes will persist in sectors like manufacturing and therefore probably likely they will continue within construction for the foreseeable future. Interesting though to consider if there are any relevant use cases that could be useful to construction.

We provide guidance and configuration files to support compliant IFC-SPF outputs but no one has to use them if teams can demonstrate compliance through an alternative process. To date though I can count on one hand the number of companies who have used their own process in the last 8 years.

But there is already an app! 🤣

We create a manual parameter for Revision but don’t understand why anyone would want to combine that with the Version as they are completely different pieces of meta data.

If users are following the UK National Annex of ISO 19650-2, the Version is irrelevant so can’t see what the purpose of combining these 2 Attributes is. Probably a request from a user who hasn’t read or even bought the standard.

I actually find the manual process (although time consuming) very useful to understand the schema and spot errors. In the grand scheme of things t’s a bit of short term pain for a much longer term benefit.

It’s a manual exercise. Not found the change log comprehensive enough (or particularly understandable) for what I need.