How Every Case Is Researched, Verified & Reviewed
Our editorial method explains how roof-geometry scenarios enter the casebook, which checks they must pass, and how corrections are handled after publication.
Which Scenarios Enter the Casebook
We document roof-plane junctions where automated modeling commonly produces misleading geometry: unequal pitches, offset plate heights, skewed valley lines, and compound intersections that require manual verification.
Case Sourcing
Scenarios are drawn from documented drafting failures, reader submissions, and workshop reconstructions. Each candidate must present a reproducible geometric conflict rather than a styling preference.
Geometric Verification
Planes are rebuilt as vector models: pitch ratios, baseline elevations, and ridge coordinates are recomputed independently so the published values describe geometry, not software output.
Peer Cross-Review
A second contributor audits every case against the same inputs. Discrepancies are reconciled or disclosed as open questions before a note is published.
No Sponsorship, No Tool Promotion
RoofJunction Casebook accepts no paid placements, sponsored reviews, or software endorsements. Third-party applications such as Chief Architect appear only as illustrative modeling environments.
Illustrative values in our cases are educational assumptions, never finished construction dimensions. Where a scenario cannot be fully resolved on paper, we say so explicitly and list the questions that remain open.
Corrections & Updates
- Reader-reported geometric errors are re-modeled before any correction is published.
- Revised cases are re-audited under the same verification routine as new material.
- Material changes are documented in the case note rather than silently edited.