Yes, yes they can.

Today's commentary section in the Chicago Tribune features a submission titled Can buildings stay important? (registration req'd) by Phillip G. Bernstein, an architect and professor at Yale School of Architecture, arguing that the recent collapse at Terminal 2E of Charles de Gaulle Airport outside Paris that killed four people indicates that methods for translating architects' and engineers' drawings into built form are outdated, and that technology can bridge this communication gap.



Not surprisingly, Bernstein is also vice-president of Autodesk Inc., the maker of AutoCAD, 3D Studio VIZ, Architectural Desktop, and Revit, among many other pieces of CAD software. In many ways, his commentary speaks about those last two products, which attempt to become intelligent, systems-based tools, rather than purely drafting tools. Features like 3d model-linking, database links, reference links and construction assemblies are innovative in terms of CAD, but they still have a long way to go before an architect can create something beyond the strict limitations of these pieces of software. Simple drafting, be it hand or computer, still yields the best results, regardless of the "crude drawings that serve as a visual shorthand for builders."



It makes me wonder though, is it commentary? Or promotion?