Re: As a "general rule"?

rickman wrote:

What does a requirement mean when it is stated as a "general rule"?

I find it amazing that engineers who's entire job is dealing with specs
and requirements and hard facts will generate a formal requirement that
"handbook xyz be followed as a general rule".

They have taught us that a requirement should be unambiguous and
testable. I find this type of requirement to be neither. Anyone else
find this sort of irrational behaviour in engineers?

There is nothing rational about making everything a requirement and
not including any suggestions/guidelines. Nor would it be rational
to insist that those suggestions/guidelines be treated as requirements.

Guy Macon