John -
Since I am trying to comply with an end product standard's requirements, component standards' marking requirements would not apply to end-product markings, unless explicitly stated in the end-product standard. It is reasonable to expect that plain language markings (using appropriate national languages) communicate at least as well as abbreviated markings. It seems rational that the 60065 accepted abbreviation taken from 60127 should be optional, rather than a prescriptive requirement, and that plain language markings should be acceptable in lieu of an abbreviation. Rather than vague, 60950-1 is flexible. Regards, Peter L. Tarver, PE Product Safety Manager Homologation Services Sanmina-SCI Corp. 2000 Ringwood Ave. San Jose, CA 95131-1749 V: 408-904-2081 F: 408-904-2095 M: 408-234-3529 [email protected] > From: John Woodgate > Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2003 12:10 PM > > Aren't you trying to conform to IEC 60950? If so, > the code that I posted > is what is required. I am surprised that clause > 1.7.6 is so vague, when > the corresponding clause in IEC 60065 is very > explicit that the code > specified in IEC 60127 shall be used. > -- > Regards, John Woodgate This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: [email protected] with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: [email protected] Dave Heald: [email protected] For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: [email protected] Jim Bacher: [email protected] Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
