Living documents?

[Barry Campbell]

On 5/16/06, Dan Goldstein <DGoldstein at riverainmedical.com> wrote:

> Finally, someone's defined the difference between "not living" (can be
> updated by a new part number or revision number) and "dead" (can be
> used, but not updated). In light of Geoff Hart's earlier post, should
> "not living" documents be filed under "Shaun"?

Any objections to the phrases "constantly evolving" or "rapidly
evolving" to describe the phenomenon of frequently changed/updated
documentation?  (Apart from theological ones, of course.)

I'm convinced in re "living documents" and will attempt to refrain
from this usage in the future.  :-)

- bc

-- 
Barry Campbell <barry at campbell-online.com>
http://campbell-online.com