Networking Historic Environmental Standards to Address Modern Challenges for Sustainable Conservation in HBIM

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

There are some interesting ideas presented in this paper and it deals with an interesting problem.The total value of this work is good contribution.

The article was written at a good academic level. In opinion of this reviewer  the work submitted for review could be accept after minor revision:

Corrections to minor methodological errors. A new figure with the steps of the proposed methodology could be included. Table 1  (it is Table 1 or figure 1?) Authors should indicate the advantages and disadvantages of your proposal compared to other approaches. The concluding section could be shown advantages, disadvantage and limitation of the the proposal.

Author Response

Responses to Reviewer 1 comments:

A new figure with the steps of the proposed methodology could be included. Table 1  (it is Table 1 or figure 1?) 

I have added a table illustrating the sequence of methods (Table 1) (lines 297-301). References to the old Table 1 (lines 375 and 377) have been changed to "Table 2"

 Authors should indicate the advantages and disadvantages of your proposal compared to other approaches.

I have added a sentence (lines 237-9): "In this research we have sought to engage with historic standards in order to develop a new methodological approach with the advantage of building on a specific technical knowledge base but that also makes use of accessible platforms for dissemination." 

I have re-phrased another (lines 283-4): "By comparison, here, in order to scale-up the image matching process and cope with larger datasets,..."

The concluding section could be shown advantages, disadvantage and limitation of the the proposal. 

I have added a paragraph (lines 638-649) in order to clarify this:

"The methods deployed here have worked between survey, modelling in principle, image classification and mapping in an attempt to draw and share the advantages of generalisable results. Although the sample of buildings referred to here is unique in its extent and consistency for this era, there are disadvantages in the total scope for reverse engineering. Later Twentieth Century buildings may offer considerably more potential for refining an approach based on mass produced building components. In the UK, however, the heritagisation of post-war buildings of a significantly standardised nature is not yet underway to any significant degree. There are further limitations in the potential for generalising approaches to environmental retrofitting indicated here which carry significant responsibilities for balancing priorities for the sustainable conservation of historic buildings. It should therefore not be seen as a means to develop policy to trump expertise, rather as a bridge to augment design decisions which will inevitably remain highly site, budget and context specific."

 

I have attached the whole paper with the new table and the revised text in red here. I have also attached the table as a file on its own.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

I have read a very well written manuscript. The ideas are easy to follow. The manuscript proves a deep interest in the area, a rigorous survey of the state of the art and an appropriate manner of conducting the research.

The text is fluent and the research is easy to reproduce as the steps are well and in detail explained.

I consider the paper suitable for publication 

 

 

Author Response

Many thanks to reviewer 2 for their supportive comments