Management Methods for Attached Maps of the Road Ledger and 7 Things to Keep in Mind When Updating

Maps attached to the road ledger are important documents for depicting, in drawing form, a road’s area, width, length, boundaries, structures, occupancies, connecting roads, and roadside conditions. In road management practice, they are often referenced together with the ledger’s record information and are used in a wide range of situations, including responding to inquiries, occupancy consultations, boundary confirmation, road improvements, disaster response, maintenance management, and repair planning.

On the other hand, maps attached to the road ledger are not finished once created. They need to be continuously updated in response to road construction, changes in administrative areas, changes in road width, boundary determinations, structural updates, changes in on-site conditions, replacement of survey results, and so on. If management procedures remain unclear during operation, this can lead to referencing outdated drawings, being unable to trace update histories, or failing to notice discrepancies between the field and the maps.

In this article, aimed at practitioners responsible for handling road ledger maps in their work, we explain seven key points to keep in mind for routine management and updates. The content is organized around concepts that are commonly important regardless of the format in which the maps are managed—paper drawings, PDFs, CAD data, GIS data, or web-viewable data.

Table of Contents

• Clearly manage the latest version of the road ledger attached maps

• Standardize the management rules for the road ledger attached maps

• Always retain the original pre-update copy and past versions

• Keep a record of update history and reasons for corrections

• Confirm any inconsistencies between on-site conditions and the road ledger attached maps

• Verify consistency with the road ledger and related documents

• Establish a system that makes it easy to continuously update the road ledger attached maps

• Summary

Clearly manage the latest version of the maps attached to the road ledger

The first and most important thing in managing road ledger maps is to make it clear to anyone which drawing is the latest version. Road ledger maps are referenced not only within the responsible department but also by road administrators, design staff, maintenance staff, front-line staff, contractors, and related agencies. Therefore, not knowing which version is the latest represents a significant practical risk.

A common problem is that, for the same route or the same area, paper drawings, PDFs, CAD data, in-progress data, delivered data, and review data end up mixed together. Even if a file name includes a date, if you cannot tell whether it is the creation date, the update date, the review date, or the delivery date, you cannot rely on it in practical work. Also, if the newest drawings remain only in the responsible person's personal folder or in email attachments, organizational management breaks down.

To clarify which version is the latest, it is important to first separate the official version from the working version. The official version is a drawing that has been checked and may be referenced in operations. The working version is a drawing that should not yet be used officially—such as when it is being revised, under review, returned for correction, or temporarily applied. If this distinction is unclear, drawings that are still in intermediate stages may end up being used for customer-facing interactions or design reviews.

Establishing a set of rules for file names also makes them easier to manage. Including information such as the route name, map-sheet number, management number, update date, edition number, and whether it is an official or working version allows you to infer the file’s contents before opening it. However, it is important not to rely solely on file names; you should also manage the latest versions in a management ledger or index. When there are many maps attached to the road ledger, the practice of searching for the latest version only within folders has its limits.

Also, when using paper drawings, you should not judge the latest version solely by the paper’s stamp or storage location; you need to make the latest version identifiable in the electronic data as well. Even if your practice treats the paper as the authoritative source, viewing and sharing are often done with electronic data, so discrepancies between the paper and electronic versions will cause confusion. When you update a paper drawing, the update should be handled as a single sequence of tasks that includes creating a PDF and reflecting the changes in the electronic data.

When managing the latest version, you need to be aware not only of the update date but also of the effective start date. For example, if you revise the attached drawings in the road ledger after construction is completed, the drawing’s update date may not match the actual date when the road area or structure changed. For inquiries or when checking a past point in time, it is important to know which point in time the drawing represents. Therefore, rather than simply keeping only the latest file, recording which date’s conditions the drawing reflects will make later verification smoother.

The maps attached to the road ledger are fundamental materials used for daily road management. If the latest version is clearly identified, decision-making is less likely to be confused even when the person in charge changes. Conversely, if the latest version is unclear, it becomes difficult to trust and use the drawings in practice, even if the drawings themselves are highly accurate. When reviewing management methods, it is important to first establish the location of the latest version, the distinction between the official version and working copies, and records of update dates and the points in time at which they were applied.

Standardize the management rules for maps attached to the road ledger

To operate the maps attached to the road ledger consistently, it is essential to standardize management rules rather than rely on individual experience or customs. Because these maps are used as foundational reference materials for road management over long periods, they must be kept so they can be managed in the same way even if staff are reassigned or contractors change.

If management rules are not standardized, file names, folder structures, drawing numbers, layer configurations, scales, legends, notes, update procedures, and verification methods will differ from person to person. As a result, it can take a long time just to find a drawing, the same road may be depicted differently across drawings, and it can become unclear what needs to be corrected during updates. In particular, for road ledger attached drawings that have been prepared over multiple fiscal years, the methods used to create them differ by year, which can make later integration or updates a major burden.

In the management rules, first clarify the storage location. It is important to decide which location will be authoritative—such as the departmental shared area, the business system, the document management area, or the drawing management area. Even if the same file is placed in multiple locations, the official reference should be limited to one. If viewing, editing, and backup copies are mixed together, it becomes unclear which data should be updated.

Next, organize the units for the maps attached to the road ledger. Whether they are managed by route, by map sheet, by area, or linked to the road ledger’s management number will affect how easy they are to operate. In practice, it is advisable to use as a basis which unit inquiries and update tasks typically occur in. At service counters people often search by address, lot number, or route name, while in design and maintenance they often search by section or map sheet, so providing multiple search axes improves practical usability.

Rules for drawing data are also important. When managing CAD data, it is necessary to standardize layer names, line types, line colors, text sizes, annotation methods, coordinate systems, scales, drawing frames, legends, and the methods for representing road area lines and centerlines. Even when managing PDFs or images, it is important to align resolution, paper size, rotation orientation, drawing numbers, file names for search, and the display order when viewing. When handling the data as GIS, it is necessary to organize attribute fields, coordinate systems, units for subdividing features, and the methods for linking to the road ledger.

You should also establish approval rules for updates. Maps attached to the road ledger are not mere reference drawings but materials that affect decisions in road management. Therefore, rather than making a revised version official simply because a worker has edited it, clearly specify the verifier, the approver, the date the change is applied, and the scope of the update. In particular, corrections affecting the road area, road width, or boundaries require on-site verification and cross-checking with related documents, so it is safer not to treat them the same as simple drawing edits.

Also, when outsourcing, it is important to document management rules as delivery specifications. If the contractor produces work using its own drawing rules, the delivered files may not match existing agency- or company- internal data and may require rework after delivery. By specifying in advance the layer structure, file formats, drawing numbers, deliverable composition, how to record revision history, and inspection methods, you can reduce post-delivery rework.

Management rules are not something you create once and finish. During operation, if issues arise—such as being hard to search, hard to update, or prone to missed checks—you need to review the rules. However, because frequent changes make it difficult to maintain consistency with past data, when you do change rules it is desirable to record the reason for the change and the effective date.

The quality of the maps attached to the road ledger is not determined solely by drafting accuracy. When management rules are standardized, the materials become easier to find, update, and hand over. The basic principle of managing maps attached to the road ledger is to change from a state in which only a specific person understands them to a state in which anyone can handle them using the same procedures.

Please translate the following input into English.

Always retain the original document and previous versions before updating

When updating maps attached to the road ledger, be sure to retain the original copy before the update and any past versions. If you only keep the updated drawings, you will no longer be able to verify past conditions, which can cause difficulties in responding to inquiries or confirming the sequence of events. Roads are public facilities managed over long periods, and past drawings also have practical value.

Maps attached to the road ledger reflect changes such as modifications to the road area designation, changes in road width, road improvements, sidewalk installation, updates to structures like side ditches and retaining walls, alterations to intersection geometry, and adjustments to the boundary between road land and private land. While these changes can sometimes be understood from the current drawing alone, there are situations where a judgment cannot be made without reviewing past history. For example, if you need to confirm how the road area was treated at a particular point in time, how the drawings changed before and after boundary confirmation, or how the width changed before and after construction, past versions are required.

If you don't keep past versions, restoring after an update mistake becomes difficult. When correcting the maps attached to the road ledger, tasks arise such as deleting a single line, fixing a single character, or moving a boundary line slightly, but unintended changes can sometimes creep in. If you have the original version from before the update, you can check the differences and pinpoint the areas to fix. However, if you operate by only overwriting files when saving, you won't be able to track what changed and when.

Past versions that should be retained are not simply every in-progress file, but the formal versions that mark milestones. For example, the formal version as of the fiscal year-end, the version reflecting changes after construction completion, the finalized version after area changes, and the version that has undergone inspection as a commissioned deliverable. Keeping every in-progress file complicates management, but it is necessary to retain the versions that were officially used and those that served as the basis for decisions.

When storing past versions, it is important not to confuse them with the current version. Simply moving files into a past-versions folder can result in them being referenced by mistake. Give past versions names that indicate the applicable route, the map sheet, the edition number, the effective date, and the reason for retention, and separate their storage locations and display methods from those of the current official version. Even in lists for viewing, current and past versions must be clearly distinguished.

For paper drawings, you should also decide how to handle the original paper copies before updating. Drawings with handwritten corrections or red annotations can be important materials that show the history of updates. Before disposing of the paper, scan and digitize it and store it linked to the updated content so it can be easily reviewed later. In particular, drawings that contain notes from site inspections or the results of discussions should be treated not as merely old drawings but as records that document the decision-making process.

For electronic data, the concept of backups is also important. Because data from road ledger attached maps accumulates over a long period, a mechanism is needed to prevent loss due to accidental deletion, corruption, overwriting, or changes to the storage location. In addition to regular backups, it is prudent to keep a separate copy of the data before major update operations. In particular, in environments where multiple people can edit the same data, rules for editing permissions and save operations should also be established.

Retaining past versions is not merely careful management. It forms the foundation that supports the reliability of the maps attached to the road ledger. By keeping the ability to explain how the current drawings were created, internal verification, external explanations, contract management, and handovers become easier. During update work, attention tends to focus on creating new drawings, but preserving the pre-update state is equally important.

Record update history and reasons for fixes

When updating the maps attached to the road ledger, it is important to record not only what was corrected but also why it was corrected. Changes on the drawings may be visible at a glance, but whether those changes resulted from on-site verification, as-built drawings, boundary confirmation results, or corrections to the road ledger records cannot be determined without checking the history.

Maps attached to the road ledger that lack update histories make it easy for a successor to be uncertain when making judgments. For example, even if a road boundary line has shifted from a previous drawing, if the reason is unknown one cannot determine whether it is a correct correction, a drafting error, or simply an operational mistake. Likewise, when the numerical value of a road’s width has changed, its meaning varies depending on whether the change is based on field surveying, a correction of inconsistent notation, or a reflection of post-construction changes.

In the update history, recording the update date, updater, verifier, affected route, affected map sheet, locations of amendments, amendment details, reasons for amendment, supporting documents, and approval status makes it more practical for everyday use. It is not necessary to write everything in detailed sentences, but you should include enough information for someone reading it later to understand the background of the changes. Recording the supporting documents in particular is important. If it is clear which materials the changes were based on—such as as-built drawings, survey results, boundary confirmation documents, road area change documents, field survey records, and consultation records—the verification work becomes much easier.

Update histories can be recorded as annotations within the drawing or managed in a separate management ledger. Writing them on the drawing makes it easy to grasp the update status from that single drawing, but if many detailed entries are written the drawing becomes hard to read. Managing them in a ledger makes searching and aggregating easier and also makes it easier to organize updates that span multiple drawings. In practice, it is convenient to record only the minimum information such as revision number and update date on the drawing and manage the details in an update history ledger.

When documenting the reason for a correction, it's important to avoid vague expressions. Simply writing "correction," "update," or "reflected" will not make sense later. It's desirable to describe the background of the correction in a way that is understandable, such as reflecting the sidewalk shape following completion of road improvement work, correcting the position of a gutter based on on-site verification, revising boundary lines based on road area change documents, or correcting the width notation to resolve inconsistencies with the road ledger records.

Maintaining an update history also contributes to quality control. With a record of updates, you can understand the number and content of update tasks, the types of mistakes that tend to occur, and the routes or areas that require frequent corrections. This makes it easier to prioritize future field surveys, outsourced orders, and data maintenance. In addition, if similar corrections are being repeated, it may reveal potential problems in the source data or work procedures.

When updating road ledger attached drawings through outsourcing, including the submission of an update history as part of the deliverables is effective. If you only receive the updated drawings, the client will bear a large burden in checking the differences. If the corrected locations and the reasons for the corrections are organized, verification during inspection becomes easier and returns and rechecks can be reduced. For the contractor as well, recording which materials were used as the basis for the corrections makes it easier to respond to inquiries.

The maps attached to the road register not only show the current condition but also serve as records that accumulate the history of road management. If update histories and reasons for corrections are preserved, it becomes easier to explain the reliability of the drawings. Conversely, drawings without a history, no matter how tidy they appear, become documents whose basis cannot be verified. When updating, it is important to always perform the task of recording the history together with the task of correcting the drawings.

Confirm discrepancies between on-site conditions and the map attached to the road ledger

When updating road register maps, it is important not to complete the work using only the information on the drawings, but to check for discrepancies with actual site conditions as necessary. Road register maps are created based on past survey results and construction documents, so changes in the field are not necessarily reflected immediately. In road management practice, decisions tend to be made on the assumption that the drawings and the field match, but in reality small discrepancies can accumulate.

Places prone to discrepancies include road width, the positions of side ditches and curbs, sidewalk configurations, areas near road boundaries, slopes and retaining walls, corner chamfers at intersections, the shapes of entrances and exits, roadside appurtenances, occupying objects, pavement edges, and drainage facilities. These are parts that tend to change due to construction or repairs, roadside development, occupancy works, disaster recovery, and the like. Even if they are represented as straight lines on drawings, they may be curved in the field or the positions of structures may be shifted.

In field inspections, it is important not only to take photos but also to record them so that it is clear which part of the road register map was checked. Linking photos, survey points, location information, inspection date, inspector, and inspection details makes it easier to reflect the findings in update work. Even if a large number of site photos remain, they will be difficult to use later if you cannot tell where on the drawings each photo corresponds to.

In particular, discrepancies involving road areas and boundaries need to be handled with care. The edge of pavement or the position of structures on site does not necessarily indicate the road area. Lines that appear to be boundaries on site may not match legally defined road areas or management zones. Therefore, do not make judgments based solely on on-site confirmation; it is necessary to cross-check with boundary documents, land documents, survey results, and records of past consultations.

The same applies when confirming road widths. If the width measured on site differs from the width shown on the road register map, you need to determine whether the discrepancy is due to different measurement locations, the age of the drawing, the failure to reflect changes after road improvements, or differences in the method of notation. Because the width on the road register map may be recorded as a representative value for a section, it is better not to simply conclude that a single measured value is incorrect.

When reconciling with on-site conditions, it is also important to clearly define the scope of the updates. If only part of a construction section is updated, the connection to existing drawings at the ends of the work area can become awkward. At locations where the updated area connects to areas outside the update scope, it is necessary to confirm that alignment, widths, positions of structures, and annotations are continuous. Focusing solely on localized corrections makes it easy to overlook consistency with adjacent drawings and neighboring sections.

In recent years, methods for on-site verification have diversified. In addition to the traditional approach of bringing paper drawings for verification, there are methods that verify while viewing drawings on tablets or smartphones, methods that record photos with location information, and methods that obtain high-precision location data to compare against drawings. Making the information collected on-site usable directly in the update process helps reduce transcription errors and memory-related mistakes.

Because maps attached to the road ledger are materials used for on-site road management, they cannot be considered independently of the actual site. Updating work requires not only reflecting existing materials but also a perspective that cross-checks them against actual site conditions. Even if drawings are consistent on paper, if they are misaligned with the field, practical problems will occur. By properly incorporating on-site verification, the reliability of the maps attached to the road ledger can be enhanced.

Verify consistency with the road ledger and related materials

When updating the road ledger attached drawings, you need to verify consistency not only with the standalone appearance of the drawings but also with the main road ledger and related materials. Because road ledger attached drawings are often used as graphic materials to supplement the record information in the road ledger, discrepancies between the records and the attachments can impede practical decision-making.

Particular items to check are route name, route number, start and end points, length, width, road area, road type, management classification, structures, intersecting roads, map sheet number, record number, and so on. A common issue in road ledger management is that the attached maps have been updated while the records remain outdated, or conversely that the records have been corrected but the attached maps have not been updated. When you cannot determine which should be considered authoritative, extra verification work is required during customer service or design review.

When ensuring consistency between maps attached to the road ledger and related documents, cross-checking with the as-built drawings is also important. After works such as road improvements, pavement repairs, sidewalk construction, and drainage facility installation, it is necessary to determine how much of the as-built drawings’ content should be reflected in the maps attached to the road ledger. Even if the as-built drawings show detailed structures and construction extents, the maps attached to the road ledger may record only the information required for management, organized accordingly. Rather than copying everything verbatim, a perspective is required to organize the information into what is necessary for the maps attached to the road ledger.

Attention must also be paid to consistency with survey results. If new survey results are available, the coordinates and alignments may differ from those in the existing road ledger maps. In such cases, you must decide whether to correct the entire existing drawing, update only the affected locations, and how to handle the connections with adjacent drawings. As a result of inserting highly accurate data only in part, discontinuities with surrounding drawings can become conspicuous.

Consistency with land acquisition and boundary documents must not be overlooked. The road boundary lines shown on the map attached to the road ledger relate to land acquisition and boundary confirmation materials. If the boundary line is changed based only on the positions of on-site structures or the pavement edge, it may no longer match the basis recorded for the land. For corrections involving boundaries, before updating the drawings it is necessary to verify the supporting documents and confirm mutual understanding among the parties involved.

If information about encroachments and road appurtenances is recorded on the supplemental map, check its consistency with the occupancy ledger, facility management ledger, inspection records, and so on. It is not necessary to include all facility information in detail on the road ledger’s supplemental map, but if the wording contradicts related documents, confusion can arise during on-site verification and maintenance. It is important to clarify which information should be included on the road ledger’s supplemental map and which should be managed in separate ledgers.

In consistency checks, the connections between drawings are also important. Road ledger attached maps are often divided into multiple map sheets or sections, so you should verify at the junctions with adjacent drawings that the road centerline, area boundary lines, widths, structures, and annotations match. Even if a single drawing appears correct on its own, issues such as lines not connecting to the neighboring drawing, changes in width notation, or differing representations of the same facility will reduce the overall reliability.

Also, depending on the timing of the update work, related materials may not yet be finalized. Even if you want to update drawings immediately after construction is completed, if the survey results and as-built documents have not been verified, they may need to be treated as provisional updates. To make them official, it is safer to require that the supporting documentation be finalized and that the necessary verifications have been completed.

The road ledger attached map is not a standalone drawing, but is connected with multiple pieces of information related to road management. When updating, not only cosmetic corrections but also confirming relationships with records, survey results, construction documents, land acquisition documents, boundary documents, and facility ledgers will result in a highly reliable drawing that can be used in practice. If consistency checks are omitted, inquiries and requests for corrections tend to increase later, so they should be incorporated as an important step in the update process.

Create a system that makes it easy to continuously update the maps attached to the road register

In managing maps attached to the road register, it is important not only to tidy up the current drawings but also to create a system that makes it easy to continue updating them in the future. Maps attached to the road register are documents that are updated over the long term to reflect changes in roads. Even if they are prepared carefully at the time of creation, if the system requires too much effort for each update, operations will eventually stall and discrepancies with the field will increase.

To create a system that makes continuous updates easy, you must first clarify the entry points for updates. Information that should prompt updates to road ledger maps arises from various channels, such as road construction, occupancy works, boundary confirmations, field surveys, disaster recovery, changes to road areas, maintenance and repairs, inquiries from residents, and information provided by other departments. If this information becomes buried in staff members’ memories or individual emails, updates will be missed. It is important to establish a process to accept cases requiring updates, manage their progress, and reflect them in the official version once completed.

Next, it is necessary to standardize the update process. If you define a sequence of steps—confirmation of the update targets, collection of supporting materials, on-site verification, drawing revisions, consistency checks, approval, incorporation into the official version, history registration, and sharing with stakeholders—you can reduce variation between personnel. If update work depends on individuals, when the person in charge changes the quality of the work can deteriorate and past decisions may not be carried forward.

Data formats also affect ongoing updates. If you manage everything only in formats that are difficult to edit, even minor revisions become time-consuming. PDFs and images for viewing are convenient, but the source data for updates must also be properly stored. Separating data used for edits and attribute management—such as CAD data or GIS data—from data used for viewing and sharing makes operations easier. The important thing is to balance ease of viewing with ease of updating.

Improving searchability is also indispensable for ongoing updates. If it takes time to find the maps attached to the road ledger, both update work and verification work become inefficient. If you make it possible to reach the required drawing from route name, place name, map sheet number, management number, update date, project name, record number, etc., the burden of daily tasks will be reduced. In particular, for responding to inquiries, it is important to be able to display the relevant location immediately.

It's also worth reconsidering the sharing method. If the maps attached to the road ledger exist only on specific terminals or as paper files, they cannot be checked when the person in charge is absent, and multiple departments may be unable to view the same information. Set up a secure environment for sharing within the agency or company, and by separating viewing permissions from editing permissions you can achieve both convenience and manageability. Operationally, it is practical to restrict who can edit while expanding viewing access to the necessary scope.

A system that is easy to update should also include methods for acquiring on-site information. If the practice is to jot down what was confirmed on site on paper and then transcribe it onto drawings back at the office, mix-ups in locations and omissions are likely to occur. Keeping records with location information on site and linking photos and notes to positions on the drawings will improve the accuracy and speed of updates. Management of road register maps should be considered to include not only the organization of drawings in the office but also the methods for on-site verification.

Furthermore, it is necessary to clarify the approach to update frequency. Ideally, all changes would be reflected immediately, but in practice confirmations and approvals can take time. Therefore, it is realistic to manage changes separately as important changes that should be reflected immediately, changes that are batched and applied at regular intervals, and changes to be reviewed at the next maintenance. However, to avoid leaving pending information unattended, it is necessary to record a list of unapplied items and the reasons for holding them.

Ongoing updating of the maps attached to the road ledger is not simply a drafting task but the creation of a system to maintain road management information. If there is a system that makes updates easy, changes in the field can be reflected quickly, and responses to inquiries and decisions about maintenance management will proceed smoothly. Conversely, if the system is weak, no matter how accurate the drawings are, they will become inconsistent with the actual site over time. For maps attached to the road ledger, not only the quality at the time of creation but also the design for continued operation is important.

Summary

When organizing the management methods and precautions for updating the maps attached to the road ledger, the important points are to clearly identify the latest version, unify management rules, retain the pre-update originals and past versions, record update history and reasons for corrections, verify discrepancies with actual field conditions, check consistency with the road ledger and related materials, and establish a mechanism that facilitates ongoing updates. These may appear to be separate tasks, but they all contribute to maintaining the reliability of the maps attached to the road ledger.

Road ledger attached maps are materials used daily at road management sites. They are referenced in many tasks, such as responding to inquiries at service counters, confirming road occupancy, construction planning, maintenance and management, boundary verification, and assessing conditions during disasters. Therefore, situations where drawings are outdated, the latest version is unknown, they do not match the field, or update histories are not retained affect not only work efficiency but also the accuracy of judgments.

What deserves particular attention is not to treat updates to the maps attached to the road ledger as temporary, ad hoc corrections. Roads are constantly changing. Construction, repairs, occupancy, roadside use, disasters, and boundary or zoning changes continuously generate information that should be reflected on the drawings. Rather than leaving update work to individual staff, establishing a workflow from when information is generated to when it is incorporated into the official version will reduce missed updates and oversights in verification.

Moreover, the importance of on-site verification is increasing. Even if the road ledger supplementary maps are compiled solely from desk-based materials, they become difficult to use in practice if they do not match the field. If positions, photos, notes, and positioning information confirmed on-site can be used to update drawings, the rework from field survey to incorporation into the drawings can be reduced. In particular, road width, areas near boundaries, structure locations, and intersection shapes are parts where discrepancies between the field and the drawings are likely to lead to operational problems.

To manage road ledger maps efficiently, rather than relying solely on paper or PDFs, it is necessary to adopt an approach that links editable data, view-only data, history/version management, and field records. You don’t need to upgrade everything at once. Even by first organizing the basics—managing the latest version, file-naming rules, update history, archiving past versions, and linking field photos—you can greatly improve operational visibility.

If you want to further improve the efficiency of on-site inspections and update work, using devices that can obtain high-precision position information is also effective. LRTK, an iPhone-mounted GNSS high-precision positioning device, is an option that makes it easier to use on-site position data for checking and updating road ledger maps. When you want to streamline management of road ledger maps from the field—such as confirming road widths, recording the positions of structures, linking positions to on-site photographs, and checking discrepancies between drawings and current conditions—using high-precision positioning like LRTK is a natural improvement measure.