Category talk:101 Standard Forms: Difference between revisions
New page: Please Correct the "construction Contingency" Cell within the Project Scoping Memorandum. Construction Contingency is suppose to be 2% but the cell is multiplying it by 3%. |
mNo edit summary |
||
| (6 intermediate revisions by 4 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Please Correct the "construction Contingency" Cell within the Project Scoping Memorandum. Construction Contingency is suppose to be 2% but the cell is multiplying it by 3%. | Please Correct the "construction Contingency" Cell within the Project Scoping Memorandum. Construction Contingency is suppose to be 2% but the cell is multiplying it by 3%. | ||
[[User:tschid|Dan Tschirgi]]:The Project Scoping Memorandum has been corrected. | |||
At least one of the posters on this page (MCHR-9) is outdated. Would it be better to just have a link to the posters on MoDOT's "Contractor Forms" page? [http://www.modot.mo.gov/business/contractor_resources/forms.htm] | |||
--[[User:Martik2|Martik2]] 12:16, 9 March 2010 (CST) | |||
[[User:smithk|Keith L. Smith]]: Thanks for the heads up. We got with External Civil Rights and they have revised what they want in the EPG. | |||
The Quick Reference Guides for Contract Adjustments list AC Adjustments as a Contract Adjustment Type. This changed July 1, 2012 to be a Line Item Adjustment. The 2 QRGs for Contract Adjustments that come up in the search need to be updated to remove this as a type of Contract Adjustment. | |||
[[User:smithk|Keith L. Smith]]: It appears that the QRGs are all correct as displayed in the various EPG articles. Nonetheless, when a search is made for the QRG, old QRGs show up. This is because the EPG wiki remembers the old QRG forms (that no longer are present in the articles) and presents them with the current ones. This can be confusing. I cannot erase the wiki's "memory" or keep the search engine from seeing that history (since this same ability is crucial in many other search applications). I don't have a really good solution, unfortunately. This has occurred in other similar situations, with the results that the wiki remembered all sorts of things that no longer apply. Since the search engine can only perform as well as Google can make it, I guess all I can say is for someone to be sufficiently aware when googling the EPG and only accept those items that are currently presented in the EPG when there seems to be some sort of conflict. Not perfect, but I hope that helps. | |||
Latest revision as of 13:25, 18 January 2013
Please Correct the "construction Contingency" Cell within the Project Scoping Memorandum. Construction Contingency is suppose to be 2% but the cell is multiplying it by 3%.
Dan Tschirgi:The Project Scoping Memorandum has been corrected.
At least one of the posters on this page (MCHR-9) is outdated. Would it be better to just have a link to the posters on MoDOT's "Contractor Forms" page? [1] --Martik2 12:16, 9 March 2010 (CST)
Keith L. Smith: Thanks for the heads up. We got with External Civil Rights and they have revised what they want in the EPG.
The Quick Reference Guides for Contract Adjustments list AC Adjustments as a Contract Adjustment Type. This changed July 1, 2012 to be a Line Item Adjustment. The 2 QRGs for Contract Adjustments that come up in the search need to be updated to remove this as a type of Contract Adjustment.
Keith L. Smith: It appears that the QRGs are all correct as displayed in the various EPG articles. Nonetheless, when a search is made for the QRG, old QRGs show up. This is because the EPG wiki remembers the old QRG forms (that no longer are present in the articles) and presents them with the current ones. This can be confusing. I cannot erase the wiki's "memory" or keep the search engine from seeing that history (since this same ability is crucial in many other search applications). I don't have a really good solution, unfortunately. This has occurred in other similar situations, with the results that the wiki remembered all sorts of things that no longer apply. Since the search engine can only perform as well as Google can make it, I guess all I can say is for someone to be sufficiently aware when googling the EPG and only accept those items that are currently presented in the EPG when there seems to be some sort of conflict. Not perfect, but I hope that helps.