maybe it's speedy, but it's crap when they just show lines in the table and they're not even consecutively numbered-
lines are 3 inches long on paper and could easily by dimensioned, but they use?ÿautomated line tables---?ÿif the user has to constantly remove their eyes from the drawing to reference the stupid table for every stinking line-?ÿit isn't?ÿhelping with clarity of the drawing - it's just helping the drafter complete the letter of the recording statute with no concern for the spirit of the statute and the owner has NO Idea that they're getting a crappy product.
so screw you fast eddy and your crappy $3,?ÿ?ÿquick and dirty drafting attempt too....
/rant off
Agreed!
There is a time and a place for everything, but taking the path of least resistance (work) EVERYTIME, is just STUPID (and lazy).
I find myself PRINTING the Line Table(s) and using it to WRITE the data on the print of the Plat by hand.
?
Almost forgot.... GET OFF MY LAWN.
I work for a dot. The district surveyors doing eminent domain surveys all use line tables. Drives me nuts!!! This is a Court Exhibit going in front of a Judge, and lawyers. Are you going to interpret what your survey means to the Judge? Give me a Break!
Ugh, I hate line tables, even if they are necessary because of short line segments.?ÿ A leader to the line is usually so much more descriptive, but river meanders can make a line table a evil I cannot avoid.?ÿ And Turn that music down!
?ÿ
I've hated line tables since the first time I saw one.?ÿ The places I worked always used leaders, arrows, etc, if a label couldn't reside on the line itself.?ÿ I've continued that with my own drafting, and I've never had a problem fitting everything in.
Anti-line table party member here. ?ÿVery rarely necessary in our work.
Rankin
You forgot to mention the subdivision cadd monkeys that place a pc 0.2 away from a pi. I have subdivision plats we are working with for production builders that have line tables from 1-200, and curve tables up to 300. As far as I am concerned only Surveyors should prepare multi lot subdivisions.?ÿ ??ÿ
?ÿ
And add non-radial lines ans non-tangent curves to the list.
If we took a finger for each offense these problems would go away...
"If we took a finger for each offense these problems would go away..."
We used to have a cad tech, Gary, who had been a carpenter, but hurt his back in a fall.?ÿ Somewhere along the line he also took the ends off 3 fingers with a skill saw.?ÿ When the latest "new kid" was being instructed on some horrible cad infraction, I'd tell him this time it is not a big deal.?ÿ Next time, you lose a finger, then turn to Gary and say: "show him what happens,"?ÿ and Gary would hold up his hand.?ÿ Got some intense looks.
Boy, you'd have a field day with some of the dumba$$ municipalities around here that actually require a line table?ÿfor every line on their plats. We've had to argue with them before, citing poor drafting standards and legibility, before they'd give up and let us do it?ÿthe right way.
I am in the middle of a drawing that after ownership and headright and north arrow will absolutely have no room along the boundaries to place any text large engough to read without super magnification.
Line tablels it is and I will be screaming all the way.
And add non-radial lines ans non-tangent curves to the list.
If we took a finger for each offense these problems would go away...
I have never understood objections to this. If the cord bearing and length are provided, whats the problem??ÿ
Non-radial lines are counter-intuitive for owners and result in numerous unintentional setback violations. Non-tangengent curves create issues when offsetting. Yes you can compute both, but why make things complicated when there is zero benefit?
A good plat can be retraced with an 11C and a scratch pad using 2 formulas.
My .02
And add non-radial lines ans non-tangent curves to the list.
If we took a finger for each offense these problems would go away...
I have never understood objections to this. If the cord bearing and length are provided, whats the problem??ÿ
Because it leads to some very sloppy cogo on final maps (by some practitioners).?ÿ Lots of broken back curves on new land divisions.?ÿ When I see this sloppy geometry?ÿ as a plat reviewer (and it is not easy to see sometimes when everyone is using the chord bearing and distance as elements defining curve) I always think of the future problems being created for the retracing surveyor.?ÿ Pretty easy when the original geometry is concentric but how do you pro-rate against original broken geometry(?).?ÿ ?ÿWhy make this stuff harder than it needs to be.?ÿ
My 2 cents, Jp
