Absolutely, Bob. Couldn’t agree more! The “spirit” is better than the “letter” to my mind!
I have also head it said that “the law is an ass”, but still some of us humans thrive on taking the letter of the law to the extreme. Changing the subject completely: My wife told me this morning that a colleague of hers was called in to see the boss yesterday to justify why she has been “clocking in and starting work around 5 minutes early on a regular basis”. When she asked why this is a concern, she was told that her “working hours are as stated in the employment contract and that any deviation from them can invoke disciplinary procedures”. When she asked her boss if she could be dismissed for continuing to start work early, he said “Yes”! Her response to that was, “WOW! That would look great on my CV!” Test labs have to be careful of their comments regarding compliance to a standard. You never know what idiot will be reading your report! From: Robert Heller [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 09 February 2011 10:59 To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [PSES] EUT power cord length <[email protected]> wrote on 02/09/2011 04:51:04 AM: > From: > "John Davies, Blackwood Labs" <[email protected]> > To: > <[email protected]> > Date: > 02/09/2011 04:51 AM > Subject: > RE: [PSES] EUT power cord length > Sent by: > <[email protected]> > > You potentially have a very good point there, Bob. > > However, the standards do usually state (dare I say) a “reference > method”, whereby they state things like “where the cable length > requirements cannot be made...etc, etc, then bundle.” (I am not > quoting a particular standard here, just what I recall as being > typical words.) The implication of such statements is to meet the > cable length requirements is preferable. So they may not tell you > to cut the cable, but they never tell you not to cut the cable, so > cutting the cable isn’t a deviation. > > Even if it a lab chose to see cutting the cable as a deviation, > technical justification kicks in with the likely outcome that such a > deviation would be acceptable. I hear what you are saying but I believe that in most cases "the spirit of the law is more important than the letter of the law". Now if I could just remember who said that. :) Bob - ---------------------------------------------------------------- This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to <[email protected]> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ 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]> -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner <http://www.mailscanner.info/> , and is believed to be clean. - ---------------------------------------------------------------- This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to <[email protected]> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ 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]>
