For those that don't know what that is, first it stands for "
Geographic Information System" and you can read more at the link :)
Why am I at odds with GIS today? Because, I'm a draftsman. I work with drawings through a drafting program called AutoCAD. Still, it's all about drawing and only a little about data, unlike GIS. It's
all about data and very little about drawing, or drafting. I've tried to explain this difference, but I think the lead in our group (a GIS professional with a masters in it) still doesn't understand the concept of drafting.
So, we are all working on a pipeline project and the drawings for which we are responsible are little A4-sized pages of property parcels, depicting the pipeline going across the owner's land. It also depicts workspace for the equipment, materials and people. That space follows the sides of the easement, and is called "temporary workspace". Sometimes they need more workspace than even that, and will add little blocks of it called "additional temporary workspace" or ATWS for short (
this site appears to explain some of this.)
Well, about an hour ago I had a drawing come though the QC I'm doing where
all of the ATWS had been removed. While it might seem minor, to a draftsman, that's no minor change. Details made for the former ATWS had to be removed and the second page deleted, while the primary drawing page changed to accommodate a smaller detail just for the easement and TWS. Not so much extra work involved, but a major difference between the previous drawing and the new one. The next normal step would be to "rev it up". That is, add a revision number and date to the title-block, plus a short description of what changed. Pretty standard stuff to us drafters.
Not so with GIS. As their software is primarily a database program (a very powerful one at that, used across many different and varied fields of study) the people that use it aren't trained in drafting or our standards, much less the way we see things. And here starts the conflict between us. She sez in reply to one of my email queries about revving it up:
"But the purpose of the being revved up isn't to record the changes of the drawings. It's to replace the revision that has been submitted to the server and if it hasn't been submitted to the server there's no need to rev it up."
What? What does that even mean? After more back and forth between us, I finally figured it out for why GIS doesn't see this as a change and I do:
"This appears to be more of a conflict between how drafting defines a drawing and how GIS defines a drawing.
We see a drawing as a representation of physical work to be done in the field or a shop.
GIS sees a drawing as a compilation of data to be saved."
She didn't really agree with my assessment, either, but I still won't be making a new rev because GIS is in control on this stuff and making these weird decisions on what constitutes a changed drawing and what doesn't.
:rant: