AV MED 1 and F6424 Changes and Procedures

[WhiskeyNovember]

Look at HQAC, do you really think they understand correct versioning?

[Phantom]

Safe. Hahahaha.

[Jimothy]

I agree, but they’d still require v3.1 rather than v3.0

[JustCallMeFlight]

@Jimothy

Quite often minor versions are used for drafts, and major versions for issued documents.

That’s certainly how SharePoint versioning works. You can’t publish without going to a new major version (x.0).

@JoeBloggs

It’ll still have their name and other details on it, thus it is personal data still.

There was a recent(ish) revision to JSP 440 (or at least the marking tool used on MODNET) to allow for OFFICIAL - PERSONAL markings without going to SENSITIVE. The while rationale was that personal details don’t meet the threshold for OFFICIAL - SENSITIVE (but previously PERSONAL was only available as a caveat to SENSITIVE).

[JoeBloggs]

Very sensible!

[Anton]

So, as V4 has just been put up on SharePoint without any IBN or notification etc. Are V2’s signed before 1 Feb 24 and V3’s still valid until thir 12 month expiry date or do they need to be filled in again? Will V2’s & V3’s be rejected at AEF’s, considering the only change is a Protective Marking?

[MikeJenvey]

@Anton

Will V2’s & V3’s be rejected at AEF’s

V3 had an important change to one (at least) of the questions, so V2 should be (as per the VGS we attended a couple of months ago) be considered as defunct.

@Anton

So, as V4 has just been put up on SharePoint without any IBN or notification

i’ve highlighted this to our Wg Av team; I would expect that as there is no apparent change to medical questions / answers that V3 & V4 should be able to run concurrently (with V3 valid for one yr after the parent’s signature of course).