CENTERLINE REPORT

[Surveyor]

I was hoping that a few changes might be made to the 2006 centerline report
format.

I have attached a .pdf showing the changes, the first page is a standard
report, the second is one I re-formatted.

What do you all think, is the second page better?
Does anybody else think the existing report format is a bit jumbled?

I figured I would
throw the idea out there and see if there was any support for a
change...here goes...
http://members.isp.com/surveyor@isp.com ... XAMPLE.pdf

Jeremy

[Stephen Rhodes]

Jeremy

your formatting looks much better. Will you be submitting this to Carlson
Support ?

Stephen

"Surveyor" <surveyor@isp.com> wrote in message
news:d9cs1d$vbn$1@update.carlsonsw.com...

I was hoping that a few changes might be made to the 2006 centerline
report
format.

I have attached a .pdf showing the changes, the first page is a standard
report, the second is one I re-formatted.

What do you all think, is the second page better?
Does anybody else think the existing report format is a bit jumbled?

I figured I would
throw the idea out there and see if there was any support for a
change...here goes...

http://members.isp.com/surveyor@isp.com ... XAMPLE.pdf

Jeremy

[Surveyor]

I submitted it in Feb. of this year. I was hoping it would be included in
the new 2006 release, but it wasn't. I figured maybe if it was a good idea,
some other people could chime in and get the ball rolling.

It's nice to be able to paste that report into the drawing when sending the
data to a consultant, or simple have a nice looking report for the file. I'm
not into the report formatter too much, I want good looking reports when I
hit the print button.

I also mentioned that it would be nice to include the radial bearing when
it's a non-tangent curve.

I guess we will see where this goes. Jeremy




"Stephen Rhodes" <srhodes@cobweb.com.au> wrote in message
news:d9jc2s$eu9$1@update.carlsonsw.com...

Jeremy

your formatting looks much better. Will you be submitting this to Carlson
Support ?

Stephen

"Surveyor" <surveyor@isp.com> wrote in message
news:d9cs1d$vbn$1@update.carlsonsw.com...
I was hoping that a few changes might be made to the 2006 centerline
report
format.

I have attached a .pdf showing the changes, the first page is a standard
report, the second is one I re-formatted.

What do you all think, is the second page better?
Does anybody else think the existing report format is a bit jumbled?

I figured I would
throw the idea out there and see if there was any support for a
change...here goes...

http://members.isp.com/surveyor@isp.com ... XAMPLE.pdf

Jeremy

[Jason Bly]

Looks alright to me, but BC and EC should be PC and PT. You have PRC in the
report why not keep the same acronym terminology. I think I would like to
see each curve data on a different line, including separating radius length
from the radius coordinate.

Jason


"Surveyor" <surveyor@isp.com> wrote in message
news:d9snho$rn$1@update.carlsonsw.com...

I submitted it in Feb. of this year. I was hoping it would be included in
the new 2006 release, but it wasn't. I figured maybe if it was a good
idea,
some other people could chime in and get the ball rolling.

It's nice to be able to paste that report into the drawing when sending
the
data to a consultant, or simple have a nice looking report for the file.
I'm
not into the report formatter too much, I want good looking reports when I
hit the print button.

I also mentioned that it would be nice to include the radial bearing when
it's a non-tangent curve.

I guess we will see where this goes. Jeremy




"Stephen Rhodes" <srhodes@cobweb.com.au> wrote in message
news:d9jc2s$eu9$1@update.carlsonsw.com...
Jeremy

your formatting looks much better. Will you be submitting this to
Carlson
Support ?

Stephen

"Surveyor" <surveyor@isp.com> wrote in message
news:d9cs1d$vbn$1@update.carlsonsw.com...
I was hoping that a few changes might be made to the 2006 centerline
report
format.

I have attached a .pdf showing the changes, the first page is a
standard
report, the second is one I re-formatted.

What do you all think, is the second page better?
Does anybody else think the existing report format is a bit jumbled?

I figured I would
throw the idea out there and see if there was any support for a
change...here goes...


http://members.isp.com/surveyor@isp.com ... XAMPLE.pdf

Jeremy

[Surveyor]

Anybody else support a cleaner format for this report?


"Surveyor" <surveyor@isp.com> wrote in message news:d9cs1d$vbn$1@update.carlsonsw.com...

I was hoping that a few changes might be made to the 2006 centerline report
format.

I have attached a .pdf showing the changes, the first page is a standard
report, the second is one I re-formatted.

What do you all think, is the second page better?
Does anybody else think the existing report format is a bit jumbled?

I figured I would
throw the idea out there and see if there was any support for a
change...here goes...
http://members.isp.com/surveyor@isp.com ... XAMPLE.pdf

Jeremy

[Jason Bly]

It's fine, not a major overhaul, but you don't need to yell. I'm sure they got the message and you probably won't see it until the next release if they decide it is better.

I wish they would use Microsoft Word because of margins, some reports are running off the page.

Jason
"Surveyor" <surveyor@isp.com> wrote in message news:db70sq$9d2$1@update.carlsonsw.com...
Anybody else support a cleaner format for this report?


"Surveyor" <surveyor@isp.com> wrote in message news:d9cs1d$vbn$1@update.carlsonsw.com...

I was hoping that a few changes might be made to the 2006 centerline report
format.

I have attached a .pdf showing the changes, the first page is a standard
report, the second is one I re-formatted.

What do you all think, is the second page better?
Does anybody else think the existing report format is a bit jumbled?

I figured I would
throw the idea out there and see if there was any support for a
change...here goes...
http://members.isp.com/surveyor@isp.com ... XAMPLE.pdf

Jeremy

[Surveyor]

Heck man I wasn't yelling, If I was yelling, I would have "spoke" like this...."ANYBODY ELSE WANT NICE CLEAN PROFESSIONAL REPORTS???!!!!" see the difference?;)
Actually I'm not too worried about it, just seems like a very simple re-formatting of a text file. I sent it to them last winter, so if they thought it was worth doing, I guessed they would have included it in the 2006 version. I would venture to guess that there were more important issues to work on. Don't get me wrong I like the new release. I'm just squeaking a little bit to see what will happen.

As far as the font goes, I was just playing around to see if the site allowed special formatting. It does. JRL


"Jason Bly" <noemail@sorry.com> wrote in message news:db9ubv$f63$1@update.carlsonsw.com...
It's fine, not a major overhaul, but you don't need to yell. I'm sure they got the message and you probably won't see it until the next release if they decide it is better.

I wish they would use Microsoft Word because of margins, some reports are running off the page.

Jason
"Surveyor" <surveyor@isp.com> wrote in message news:db70sq$9d2$1@update.carlsonsw.com...
Anybody else support a cleaner format for this report?


"Surveyor" <surveyor@isp.com> wrote in message news:d9cs1d$vbn$1@update.carlsonsw.com...

I was hoping that a few changes might be made to the 2006 centerline report
format.

I have attached a .pdf showing the changes, the first page is a standard
report, the second is one I re-formatted.

What do you all think, is the second page better?
Does anybody else think the existing report format is a bit jumbled?

I figured I would
throw the idea out there and see if there was any support for a
change...here goes...
http://members.isp.com/surveyor@isp.com ... XAMPLE.pdf

Jeremy