Downsized specifications should not result in errors but they may result in ommissions.
Downsized or “SHORT-FORM” specifications as Herman R. Hoyer, PE, FCSI, CCS practices meet the requirements of the 4 Cs. Below is what Herman has to say. For additional reading see his posting elsewhere on 4Specs discussion forum.
I quote:
"Creating and developing short-form specifications requires specialized knowledge and skill, and imparting this special knowledge is the purpose of this column. It also requires an appreciation of the concept that the length of specifications should be kept in realistic proportion to the cost of the project.
First, lets define short-form specifications and establish some guidelines. Short-form specifications are construction specifications reduced to the shortest length possible without reducing the effectiveness of the specifications and without sacrificing any essential ingredients. For smaller projects, short-form specifications can take the form of notes on the drawings.
Creating and developing short-form specs is not a process involving abridgement or condensation of so-called long-form specifications. Instead, it is a fresh approach involving the reengineering of construction specifications.
Abridgement of long-form specifications invariably leads to omitting important elements. The end product of our endeavor for this column will be state-of-the-art specifications."
Anon,
Okay let me ask the obvious here. Why does the client want to pay for a full set of CD drawings yet not want to pay for a full CD project manual? Isn’t that like buying a new car but wanting to use crappy used tires…or better yet wanting to use the 3/4 size emergency spare tires. 
Are you sure that your client is an attorney? Every attorney I know is verbose and believes that more words in the contract, the better protection you have.
If the job is a simple tenant improvement job then just listing a bill of materials with “Install per manufacturer’s instructions.” could suffice.
I’ve always had the feeling that if you have a good contractor, the specs are irrelevant, because they will do what the job needs no matter what you say; and if you have a bad contractor, the specs will be irrelevant because they won’t read them and will do whatever they want to do. (and then you spend your fee arguing with them about the meaning of specific words).
the attorney as client probably thinks that documents are irrelevant because no one would be dumb enough to do substandard work for an attorney, and they might be correct about that.
I’ve done a lot of attorney’s offices, and they never wanted full documents because they seemed to figure that we would all just read their minds and know what to do. (and Marc knows this is the case because he’s married to one)
if this is a client you’ve worked with before, and you’re doing the same type of work for them that you’ve done before, you’re going to be on site regularly, and you’re working with contractors that you know, and subcontractors that are pre-selected, I think its almost more of an esthetic issue (ie, you don’t want to submit those documents for an award) than anything else. if this were new client, bid project, new contractor… I would be more diligent about the documents.
Anne, Marc, David, Wayne - I miss youy guys. Good discusion. Lynn, we need to get back in touch. I’m in Manitowoc. www.fodden.net.
i recall an article in the WSJ where a landlord was exhonerated by a judge for not leasing a space to a lawyer based upon the fact the lawyer would have them in a very unfair situation - good advice is hiding in this judge’s decision!
To be semi-serious, look at the articles by Herman Hoyer on shortform specifications in the 4specs.com archives. With Herman’s permission, I used his concepts in the portion of my book regarding shortform specifications. The keys are (1) write using the proprietary method (no alternatives or substitutions) and (2) write using common reference standards. Descriptive specifying is way too wordy. Performance specifying requires substantial testing and inspection to ensure that performance criteria are met.
Herman also has been a great advocate of Division 1 (“say it once”) and considers it a key to enforceable/buildable specifications. Use of AIA contract documents (Agreement and General/Supplementary Conditions) is probably a non-starter with an attorney/owner. So, delegate to the attorney/owner the task of creating and incorporating bidding and construction contract documents. That is, exclude their production and implementation from the scope of architectural services and leave it up to the wisdom and audacity of the attorney/owner whether to publish these documents.
A final point about shortform specifying is the use of schedules on the drawings. If finish materials, doors and frames, door hardware, colors, exterior materials, windows, louvers, etc. etc. are scheduled with products (er … “work results”) identified by proprietary nomenclature or well-known reference standards (e.g., casework construction and finishes and tile setting methods) identified in notes linked to the schedule or even drawing keynotes (but keep 'em simple), then the specifications can be radically reduced for something like interior construction.
Just to let the contractor know how important it is to do a really, really good job, you might want to put an illustration of a decapitated horse head at the top of each page (reference intended to the Godfather 1 movie).