Topic: Opinions Please - PS Layout's with referencing viewports

[StykFacE]

In the PDF file provided, I made a really quick "relocation" arrow going between two viewports on the same sheet. It's the clouded area's. I just don't like how it turned out... and I was wondering if anyone could either give an example on how they would do this, or simply critique on my attempt. Technically, my boss doesn't require us to do this, but I wanted to make it look good. All we have to do is simply note it (which it is) to the reference "Sheet-#/Tag-#" and that's it. I posted this in another forum but I want as much help as I can get on this.

Anyways, just thought I would get a little constructive criticism for future jobs. Thanks in advance to all. 

**EDIT**
For the record, I only clouded the area's simply to distinguish what I'm talking about, the clouds won't be issued with the plans or used in any way. Just to keep things clear.

[Guest]

The relocation arrow, to me, is fine.  BUT.... It looks like you've got a match line but what about the note referring you to the other portion of the plan?  How am I supposed to know that the lower portion is a continuation of the upper portion??!?  I would certainly add some sort of note referring the reader to "see X on Sheet X for continuation" or something along those lines.


Oh, and I don't think Jason Stewart would like his PE seal being posted on the 'net!  I would remove that if I were you!  *hint* *hint*

[CADaver]

The relocation arrow, to me, is fine.  BUT.... It looks like you've got a match line but what about the note referring you to the other portion of the plan?  How am I supposed to know that the lower portion is a continuation of the upper portion??!? 

I agree.  I'd use a matchline without the arrow.  Include a note at the original location that the unit is to be relocated to "SEE PLAN CONTINUATION BELOW", and a note at the new location from ""SEE PLAN CONTINUATION ABOVE".  but that's me.

Oh, and I don't think Jason Stewart would like his PE seal being posted on the 'net!  I would remove that if I were you!  *hint* *hint*

and in excellent detail and resolution... thanks.

[StykFacE]

Here's what I got now. I like it. I changed the arrow reference type, plus I added the matchlines like you guys implied about. I took the seal off, but honestly we share our plans with everyone, plus someone would have to match his signature in ink for the seal to to labeled as approved. After 12 years of him signing drawings I doubt this would be of any real consequence, but hey - never know. Let me know if this looks better to you guys. Thanks for the opinions, too. I really appreciate it.

[Josh Nieman]

TBH Stykface, since the Texas stamp is standard, and you can look up any licensed engieer's professional number, it'd be easier for me to look up the list of licensed engineers, get the number, and edit my own block than to copy that thing into CAD.  Sure it is probably something that most people would frown upon such indiscriminate posting of, but the damage is nonexistent.

If you posted his signature, maybe...