[thelist] contract vs. requirements doc

Jack Timmons jorachim at gmail.com
Wed Apr 14 08:45:05 CDT 2010

On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 8:38 AM, Bob Meetin <bobm at dottedi.biz> wrote:
> I'm reviewing a contract this AM.  As a technician, web technologist, I work
> best when I have a reasonably defined list of functional requirements in
> front of me.  With this client we've reviewed the functional requirements
> several times and agreed upon deliverables.
> What is an acceptable way in this industry to refer to the requirements but
> not include them in a contract?  Or is it really up to the parties involved?
>  Including these details makes for a lengthy document.
> -Bob

It's up to the parties involved, but I would ask why you wouldn't want
the things you're supposed to provide in the contract? If the contract
is based upon that list of deliverables, then it's advantageous for
you to include them in the contract. That should deter the client
going back and trying to say you agreed upon things you didn't, etc.

A document may be lengthy, but having a lengthy contract that protects
you is a lot better than a neater, nicer one that leaves you open to
further paperwork in more strenuous circumstances, right?

-Jack Timmons
Twitter: @codeacula

More information about the thelist mailing list