requirements & use of "shall", etc.
requirements & use of "shall", etc.
(OP)
thread174-58057: "how to use SHALL or MUST"
the IEEE Style Guide (80220)
@ ht tp://stand ards.ieee. org/guides /style/sec tion5.html
is very helpful
the IEEE Style Guide (80220)
@ ht
is very helpful





RE: requirements & use of "shall", etc.
"Good to know you got shoes to wear when you find the floor." - Robert Hunter
RE: requirements & use of "shall", etc.
http
http://govpro.com/resource_center/gov_imp_81546/
htt
http://www.iowadot.gov/design/dmanual/01c-06.pdf
http://
http:
Lots more examples including governmental and private criteria exist on the web.
RE: requirements & use of "shall", etc.
Passive - The gravel shall be placed and shaped by power equipment to the specified lines, grades, cross-sections, and depths, without segregation.
Active voice - Place and shape gravel to the specified dimensions without segregation using power equipment.
They managed to take a clear unambiguous requirement and substituted ambiguity. This is an improvement?
RE: requirements & use of "shall", etc.
A fundamental rule of most mechanical drawings is that you state the required end result, not how to achieve it.
Seems that the example stevenal found breaks those rules.
If construction workers are too ill educated to understand shall etc. then that's another issue
thread1010-222641: Use of Shall, Should, May in formal documents etc. is related.
What is Engineering anyway: FAQ1088-1484: In layman terms, what is "engineering"?
RE: requirements & use of "shall", etc.
An active revision could be:
Place the gravel and shape by power equipment to the specified lines, grades, cross-sections, and depths, without segregation.
RE: requirements & use of "shall", etc.
It can make a difference as often there is more than one way to skin a cat. For instance, on a plated part you may want some holes to be free of plating. You don't care if they make the part with holes, plug the holes & then plate it, or if they plate the part without holes then make the holes. However, I often see notes that would preclude one of these options.
So I'll stick with "HOLES SHALL BE FREE OF PLATING" or similar thank you very much.
What is Engineering anyway: FAQ1088-1484: In layman terms, what is "engineering"?
RE: requirements & use of "shall", etc.
Avoid plating in holes.
RE: requirements & use of "shall", etc.
You may not like it JLSeagull but the relevant Industry Standards for what I do don't apparently follow the latest grammar trends. They explicitly use shall etc. where appropriate.
What is Engineering anyway: FAQ1088-1484: In layman terms, what is "engineering"?
RE: requirements & use of "shall", etc.
Your preference for passive voice does not bother me. I too read ASME, API and many other standards, recommended practices etc. Few of the older standards used the command form. Words like shall clarify requirements. Verbs such as consider or avoid advise the reader of noteworthy issues with some flexibility.
The use of active voice and command form were brought to my attention in about 1986 at a technical writing seminar. I slowly began using the command form in my specifications. Today it seems very natural. Try using the active voice yourself - or don't. Sometimes you may need to use the word shall. Sometimes avoid is not strong enough. In a phrase like "Exclude carbon steel piping components in fluids with the design temperature below -20 degree F" the word exclude is stronger than avoid or consider. Furnish and install type 316L piping components, and the appropriate ASTM (or ASME) specification would be stronger.
Many governmental regulations and newer standards use the active voice in command form to reduce wordiness and add precision.
RE: requirements & use of "shall", etc.
Yoda....
RE: requirements & use of "shall", etc.
RE: requirements & use of "shall", etc.
Stating the requirement not how to get there is a fundamental rule of drawings to ASME Y14.5M-1994 1.4(e).
For an Assembly work instruction or procedure or similar I don't have a problem with it.
However, on drawings, it usually isn't correct to my understanding of the relevant standards (at least those of the US).
What is Engineering anyway: FAQ1088-1484: In layman terms, what is "engineering"?
RE: requirements & use of "shall", etc.
RE: requirements & use of "shall", etc.
Like you, I was trained to use the ASME standards instead of the ones he references (none of which apply to mechanical part definition) therefore "shall" sounds (and is) correct for our purposes. That he refuses to acknowledge the importance of following pertinent standards is suprising, though.
"Good to know you got shoes to wear when you find the floor." - Robert Hunter
RE: requirements & use of "shall", etc.
What is Engineering anyway: FAQ1088-1484: In layman terms, what is "engineering"?
RE: requirements & use of "shall", etc.
"Good to know you got shoes to wear when you find the floor." - Robert Hunter