Although it didn't seem like it at the time, one of the best parts of my CSI chapter's certification classes was reading the A201 - not selectively, but the whole thing, beginning to end. Being the heart of the construction contract, anyone who works on a project should know what's in it. I can't quote every part of it, but it's familiar enough that I can find what I'm looking for fairly quickly. I don't deal with much of it, e.g., claims and time requirements, but there are a few parts that I find of particular interest.

I remember being, as a new CSI member, somewhat confused by our election process. Having been a voter for many years, I knew that the US president did not take office immediately, but was a president-elect for a short time. So it seemed strange that, instead of voting for the next president of CSI, we vote for a person who won't take office as president for at least a year. The other problem I had had nothing to do with the process; I simply didn't know who was running for office! But we'll get to that later.

For many years, there have been debates about the future of construction specifiers. Where will we find new specifiers? Are they all dying off? Is the profession no longer needed? While I believe there is reason for concern, I don't think much has changed.

Conventions are like state or county fairs: it seems they're the same year after year, and yet, if you compare this year's to the one a few years ago, there will be small differences. But sometimes, significant changes take place between one fair and the next.

"Existing communication methods have done a good job of addressing most of the information exchange involved in construction. E-mail and electronic file transfer are commonly used between owner and architect, and between architect and consultants. One conspicuous oversight has been the contact between the design professional’s office and the contractor in the field.

My, how things have changed! The brave new world of 24/7 interconnectivity certainly is marvelous; each day brings new ways to learn more about everything, sometimes too many. I'm not going to give you the old line about "When I was a kid, we had to walk two miles to school, through the snow, uphill both ways!" And I'm not going to rail against progress. I am fascinated by new technology and new products, and I still enjoy learning about everything possible.

Isn't it interesting, that amidst all the hoopla about "sustainable" design, there has been little reduction in the stream of new, improved, state-of-the-art, can't-live-without-them products that increase energy demand? Most of these supposedly life-changing inventions offer needless conveniences, and most of them require electricity to operate. They appear to have been created for no better reason that someone could do it.

One of the most difficult things specifiers do is try to decide if one product is equivalent to another. Fortunately, many product characteristics are based on industry standards, which can make those products easier to specify and to evaluate.

In this month’s Architect, Edward Keegan does an excellent job of delineating the turmoil which the job description of “spec writer” currently seems to be under. There is no denying that the traditional picture of a dutiful technical writer, toiling away creating tomes that equal a phone book in scale, is under attack by new and disruptive technologies, online spec engines and systems and new design methodologies such as BIM. While all of this is true, the simple fact remains that you cannot complete any modern construction project with simple drawings alone, no matter how you generate those designs. You’ve got to have a full understanding of your design elements and how they relate to each other, and that relationship is always handled through the “specs”.