In message <09c2d42ff0bfca4b829cdbe89b8f66ffe87...@g3w0637.americas.hpqcorp.net>, dated Thu, 28 Jun 2007, "Conway, Patrick R (Houston)" <[email protected]> writes:
> Makes one wonder why engineers are asked to solve this equation, >instead of a combined team of engineers and business leaders. Very interesting. An EMC committee was faced with a very similar problem, about altering a requirement. There is a technical justification for it, but it costs a lot to make the equipment compliant with the new requirement, which does not involve the protection of radio services. Impasse. So I suggested exactly what you propose above. The suggestion went to the relevant national standards committees who (with one, or perhaps two, exceptions) rejected it. -- OOO - Own Opinions Only. Try www.jmwa.demon.co.uk and www.isce.org.uk There are benefits from being irrational - just ask the square root of 2. John Woodgate, J M Woodgate and Associates, Rayleigh, Essex UK - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to [email protected] Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas [email protected] Mike Cantwell [email protected] For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: [email protected] David Heald: [email protected] All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc ______________________________________________________________________ This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email ______________________________________________________________________
