Practical software guides
A project file should answer which version was approved, what changed and what evidence supports the current decision. It should not make every internal document public.
| Object | Minimum fields |
|---|---|
| Document | Identifier, revision, author, source, date and superseded version |
| Approval | Approved revision, scope, decision-maker and conditions |
| Change request | Reason, affected work, cost/time assumptions and decision |
| Question | Evidence requested, response and unresolved issue |
| Public notice | Approved summary and public contact; no confidential attachments |
Work a material variation
In a fictional fit-out, the specified tile becomes unavailable. The proposed substitute is revision B, with a different delivery date and price. The system links the comparison to the exact drawing revision. A qualified construction professional reviews code, safety, specification and warranty implications; software does not certify equivalence. Commercial approval follows separately. Do not let an approval for revision A automatically authorise revision B.
Explain a change outside the project team
A public update can say that an access path is delayed, give the reviewed next update date and explain how residents can raise a question. It should distinguish a firm commitment, a proposed change and a response still under review. Keep personal details, bids and legal advice out of that public view.
Test a superseded attachment, an unauthorised viewer and a decision changed after approval. Retain the history under an approved policy. Existing project-management software may support this with configuration; a custom portal is justified only by a specific missing permission, integration or public-view requirement.