Language again
Rather than just describing a survey marker as a pin, I will get information about the size, the depth or condition. There is a list of found and set objects on the prepared map with that description. Each survey marker on the map has a point number that is referenced to the list.
Occasionally I will get tripped up on the diameter by someone questioning the description. It goes something like ??is that the inside diameter or the outside diameter?? My reply should be that I really just meant to call it a pin.
Seriously, if I were a plumber then I could more easily understand the importance of making the distinction. However, the purpose of my description is to make the mark recognizable to the next person finding it. Recognizing the evidence that was uncovered in the case and described in such a way that is unmistakable. That is my goal, but, the propensity of people to intentionally misunderstand something is uncanny.
So, if my description of a 0.12 feet diameter galvanized pipe found down 0.5 feet gets picked apart because I did not include whether the diameter was the inside diameter or the outside diameter I haven??t failed. If I am in a good mood I will explain that a pipe that is hammered into the ground to mark a survey corner will be damaged as a result. It is easier to measure the outside diameter with a caliper on a section of the pipe somewhere below the top??
On second thought, why not just call it a pin.
Log in to reply.