3 ms·
Writing "kitty litter/zeolite clay" certainly was bad style — it left ambiguous what the relation between "kitty litter" and "zeolite clay" is, which invited th
by waqf 9y ago
Writing "kitty litter/zeolite clay" certainly was bad style — it left ambiguous what the relation between "kitty litter" and "zeolite clay" is, which invited the editor to assume that they were synonyms and to just pick one.
Remember, kids, if you receive a sentence that's ambiguous, you can't edit it to make it less ambiguous if you don't have an extrinsic reason to know what was meant. Blindly editing can only destroy information, not create it (also known as the autocorrect problem).
- Gibbon1 9y agoShould have been written as 'Zeolite Clay conforming to Specification 239.11' Specifying a generic or branded product for an off label use is just a bad bad idea. Because the manufacturer of kitty litter can't be counted to control for any properties other than those reflecting use in a cat box. Fatcat(tm) Unscented Kitty Litter might be fine until one batch shows up that's 95% zeolite clay / 5% sawdust.
- kortex 9y agoThis is exactly key. In GMP pharmaceutical manufacturing, you have to spell EVERYTHING out - chemical compound, the manufacturer, the batch. I'm quite surprised that the nuclear industry doesn't follow the same level of rigor - there ought to have been some sort of SOP document for which sorbents to mix with radioactive nitrates.