DP7
Individual
2d314252
http://proethica.org/ontology/case/9#DP7
Properties
Parent
Decision Point Id
DP7
Decision Question
Should Engineer T have proactively explored and presented alternative, safer design approaches to the client before selecting the straightforward constrained-access design, given that the constrained-access condition was explicitly recognized and documented in the construction drawings?
Focus
Engineer T's pre-design decision whether to proactively identify and present both the straightforward constrained-access design approach and the safer alternative approach to the client before finalizing construction documents, given that the constrained-access condition was recognized and documented in the drawings.
Option1
Select the straightforward constrained-access design approach and issue construction documents noting the constrained condition without presenting alternative design options to the client
Option2
Identify and present both the straightforward constrained-access approach and the safer alternative approach to the client before finalizing design, with explicit disclosure of the construction safety tradeoffs between the two options
Option3
Solicit a constructability and construction safety review from the general contractor or a construction safety specialist before finalizing the design documents, given the explicitly documented constrained-access condition
Role Label
Engineer T
TTL
@prefix rdf: <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#> .
@prefix rdfs: <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#> .
@prefix owl: <http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#> .
@prefix proethica_case_9: <http://proethica.org/ontology/case/9> .
<http://proethica.org/ontology/case/9#DP7> a owl:NamedIndividual ;
rdfs:label "DP7" ;
rdfs:subClassOf <http://proethica.org/ontology/cases#DecisionPoint> .
Metadata
Ontology
Type
Individual
Content Hash
2d3142523492d0cb...Last Updated
2026-03-08 16:29
Extraction Provenance
Generated
2026-02-24T22:57:43.806274
Generated By
ProEthica Case 9 Extraction