Morning Coffee break: Grammatical confusion - Recognizable Doors

Editor: As I slap my forehead!
Update: Re: Coffee Break Training for U.S. Fire Administration.

There seems to be some confusion regarding the grammar in a sentence in today's Coffee Break Training:

A sentence within the body of the text states: "There is no question that the doors could be confused with the adjacent wall finishes," while the photo caption reads ""The pattern on these doors provides a clear contrast to the adjacent wall."

People are asking if that is a conflict, and suggesting the sentence should read"There is no question that the doors would NOT be confused with the adjacent wall finishes." That phrasing, though, is a double negative that is grammatically incorrect.

Rather than "There is no question that the doors could be confused with the adjacent wall finishes," perhaps it would be better understoon if if read "There is no question that the doors would be confused with the adjacent wall finishes."

Thaks for your attention to detail.

Rob
-------------------------------------------------------------

RECOGNIZABLE DOORS

Take a quick look around the room where you are right now.
Is the door leading to the exit readily apparent?
Morning
Today’s Coffee Break Training, “Recognizable Doors,” describes the requirements for egress doors to be visually different from the adjacent construction or decorations.

Your Coffee Break can be downloaded from http://www.usfa.dhs.gov/downloads/pdf/coffee-break/cb_fp_2009_4.pdf

Morning Coffee break - Learning Objective
Means of Egress: Recognizable Doors
No. FP-2009-4 January 27, 2009
Learning Objective: The student shall be able to explain the requirement that doors in the means of egress must beclearly recognizable.

The pattern on these doors
provides a clear contrast to the adjacent wall.
Interior designers, decorators, and owners often select colors, patterns, and styles to convey a specific message or theme about their business.

Occasionally, these design treatments create so much “visual clutter” that it is nearly impossible to distinguish the means of egress from the adjacent walls. During an emergency, building occupants should have clear visual clues to identify the quickest and safest way out of a building.

To avoid problems and prevent confusion, the model fire and building codes require that means of egress doors be “readily distinguishable” from the adjacent construction and wall finishes so the doors are easily recognizable as doors. Mirrors or similar reflecting materials may not be used on egress doors.

No doors in the means of egress may be concealed by curtains, drapes, decorations, or similar materials.

In the illustrated example, the designer applied colorful and visually contrasting wallpaper to the door leaves.

There is no question that the doors could be confused with the adjacent wall finishes.

There is one concern with this solution, though. The wallpaper that was applied must meet the appropriate flame spread requirements for the place of assembly where these doors are located.

In this example, since the building in which it is located is protected by an automatic sprinkler system; the wallpaper must have a Class C flame spread rating. In fact, all of the wall finishes in this space must have a Class C flame spread rating.

For additional information, refer to the International Building Code® or International Fire Code®, Chapter 10, NFPA 5000®, Building Construction and Safety Code®, Chapter 11, NFPA 1, Uniform Fire Code®, Chapter 14, or NFPA 101®, Life Safety Code®, Chapter 7.

Eligible for Continuing Education Units (CEUs) - at www.nfaonline.dhs.gov
For archived downloads, go to: www.usfa.dhs.gov/nfa/coffee-break/