I guess its a problem with the use of words "security" = 'safety', the product are not allowed to become unsafe if suscepible to EMI
WOODS, RICHARD skrev: > Could you be more specific about what is ment by "functional" and "security" > demands? > > > ---------- > > From: [email protected][SMTP:[email protected]] > > Reply To: [email protected] > > Sent: Tuesday, June 16, 1998 3:42 AM > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: Poll, Changes to the EMC directive > > > > Hello everybody > > > > A new discussion has started in Europe about redesigning the EMC > > directive. > > > > Im intrested to know of this groups opinion. > > > > The proposal is to remove the functional demands on products and only > > have security demands for immunity testing. > > > > To check the opinion of this group please reply to this mail direct to > > me (not the list) with one of the following lines and Ill post a > > compilation of the results. > > > > 1. YES , I agree with the removal of fuctional demands from the EMC > > directive. > > > > 2. NO , Funktional demands should continue to be a part of the EMC > > directive. > > > > Ill start compiling the results at the end of this week (june 19) and > > mail the results next week. > > > > Thank you > > > > -- > > Petter Gärdin > > ENATOR Communications AB > > P.O. Box 360 > > S-83125 ÖSTERSUND > > SWEDEN > > > > Email: [email protected] > > Amateur Radio Callsign: SM3PXO > > Phone: +46 63 156233 > > Fax: +46 63 156199 > > > > -- Petter Gärdin ENATOR Communications AB P.O. Box 360 S-83125 ÖSTERSUND SWEDEN Email: [email protected] Amateur Radio Callsign: SM3PXO Phone: +46 63 156233 Fax: +46 63 156199
