Paul Oakley

@NigelPDavies Suggest you go back and review the ISO standards on documentation. Internationally some countries have very specific standards implementations, such as Singapore CP83.

@for59j54 @DigiNeanderthal @StewartGH1970 This shows the total lack of understanding about the original process and the benefits it achieved. Roll back to Avanti…

@DigiNeanderthal @StewartGH1970 All 2 common im afraid. Many meetings where client asks for sketch to be issued urgently but the clients mandatory process delays it e.g. Request Architect to issue>they have to update TIDP 1st>We then have to update MIDP> we have to issue MIDP 2 client>sketch can now be issued

@DRossiter87 @RowlyPaul @BSI_UK If only we had built this into Autocad Architecture 15 years ago… In fact we did!

@RowlyPaul I was talking with colleagues in @BSI_UK about this very thing last week. Live verification of CAD standards (e.g lineweights) sounds like a useful tool

CAD Standards….why do we publish to ProjectWise then wait overnight to be informed of non standard items. Why can’t this be live? Assess each new element at time creation or editing. Would such a tool be of benefit?

Speaking today at #DigiDeck22 in Zagreb, Croatia with #dctgrp #Croatia #BIM #digitalconstruction

@for59j54 @CaseyRutland 22 years ago it just worked for 2x as Teamwork demonstrated. Certification was the debate 6 years ago around IFC 4 and how it should be done. Then we now have this mess…

@OakleyCAD @CaseyRutland If IFC was easy, the tools made it invisible at a configuration level, we wouldn’t be having this debate. Perhaps BuildingSMART are somewhat accountable? If they are certifying something as compliant, perhaps the certification criteria needs adjusting to factor in ease of use?

The main difference is that the "IFC is shit" folks say only that... The "IFC works for us" folks, show proof, tools & solutions... Which group offers the most value to the conversation?

@Just_Super At the beginning… See Mervyn’s lectures on BIMelearn.com

Next week I'll be doing an internal BIM & Digital webinar for our grad programme in WSP highways. Where would you start? I'm going with the 2011 UK Gov Strategy.

@bimprocess Never mind what you call it, does it still work?

@bimprocess @for59j54 Still the industry fails to recognize the difference between cost and value. That is why the whole "Beginning with the end in mind approach is so crucial. Instead we have box ticking of useless documentation which only adds waste!

Another "Copy and Replace" EIR, replacing any reference to PAS1192-2 with ISO19650. In the last 12 months, with more than 50 EIRs landing on my desk, I have only had 2 correctly articulated ISO19650 information requirements. Pretty poor show.

@NigelPDavies Why did it take you so long to work that out? How could you fit a classification where most codes are 14 characters into a standard that limits it to 6.

@DRossiter87 @bondbryanBIM @Studio_Bim @bim_little Because the information requirements for commissioning could have a major impact on the approach to the feasibility. ISO 19650 EIR, exchange information requirements are not the container for information requirements as identified in the level 2 Employer information requirements.

@bondbryanBIM @Studio_Bim @bim_little @OakleyCAD E.g. If you appoint someone to do feasibility work, why do they need the IRs relating to commissioning? This sort of thing just introduces risk as you are asking the LAP to determine which IRs are relevant and which aren't.

Asset Information Requirements (AIR) are incorporated into Exchange Information Requirements (EIR). An AIR is not issued to delivery teams when following ISO19650-2. The EIR is how an appointing party or lead appointed party communicates their information requirements. #ISO19650

@for59j54 First this is not a new standard but a revamp of an existing standard. As I doubt you will ever write a data dictionary I don’t expect you will need to either read or implement this. Also as uk we generally stick to English to requirements of multi language etc are not required.

When you spend the week explaining to your peers that digital/BIM is nothing to be afraid of, that its a modern way of operating easily overcome with training and experience...... And then you pickup a new standard #BIMhypocrite

@bimprocess What is worse is those now issuing MIDPs which are actually MPDTs. MPDTs were a BIM protocol v1 requirement and should be provided as a Responsibility Matrix!

@Just_Super @tkunsman @UKBIMAlliance @pambhandal Your lucky to have such an informed Client! Content has now been restored.😃

@tkunsman @UKBIMAlliance @pambhandal more worryingly I found it via a tender doc for a significant / huge infra project. PAS91 in use but needs an update.

Anyone know who is behind this website? bimuk.co.uk/about/ @UKBIMAlliance @pambhandal #ukbimcrew

@Just_Super @UKBIMAlliance @pambhandal I have now restored much of the original content on BIMuk.co.uk which on review still provides a useful guide to requirements.

@Just_Super @tkunsman @UKBIMAlliance @pambhandal This site is some 10 years old and existed before the UK BIM Task group, never mind the BIM Framework. Technology for Website included flash so had to be taken down. I query because there was other content relating to CAD standards, plot styles etc. which may be still required?

@OakleyCAD @tkunsman @UKBIMAlliance @pambhandal The url in my first tweet. I understand the page is yours Paul? Can appreciate why you made it but I’d hope any gov client would ref ukbimframework.org nowadays

Yes, feedback has been very promising and hopefully a gain changer for adoption in Asia / Pacific @bimprocess @RichardsMervyn

@UKBIMAlliance @SarahDUoN @Johnad25 @JenniferMac80 @DRossiter87 @MottMacDonald @FuturebuildNow Has it even unified the UK market?

Is BS EN ISO 19650 fulfilling its promise to unify the global #BIM market? @SarahDUoN discusses this with @Johnad25 @JenniferMac80 @DRossiter87 & @MottMacDonald Marta Mroczka 18 Nov at 1pm bit.ly/3fbxJmu @FuturebuildNow #construction