We cannot read anything but "evidence" here, there is no "but" : if one applies harmonized standards, you need evidence, and that is the case in this discussion.
Within the chapter of technical documentation, that means written evidence , not a witness :<) If you have evidence about compliance to the previous standard, you do not have it to the actual standard. It's as simple as that. You need a good lawyer John to have a court reading something else. These texts were made for legal purposes, not for technical, so I referenced 2 dictionary meanings of the word evidence in a law context, which I think is right. BTW Annex II uses the same words in point 3, it’s not a slip of the pen. I checked other languages too... In French: des preuves de la conformité aux normes harmonisées éventuellement appliquées, que ce soit entièrement ou en partie In Dutch: een bewijs van de overeenstemming met de eventueel beschikbare geharmoniseerde normen die volledig of gedeeltelijk worden toegepast; In German: einen Nachweis der Übereinstimmung des Gerätes mit etwaigen vollständig oder teilweise angewandten harmonisierten Normen; All these languages use the equivalent of the word evidence, in the sense of "showing a fact beyond doubt" . Are you still sure about your new Signature ?? Regards, Ing. Gert Gremmen, BSc [email protected] www.cetest.nl Kiotoweg 363 3047 BG Rotterdam T 31(0)104152426 F 31(0)104154953 Before printing, think about the environment. -----Oorspronkelijk bericht----- Van: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Namens John Woodgate Verzonden: Saturday, August 31, 2013 3:33 PM Aan: [email protected] Onderwerp: Re: Retest because of supersded standard? In message <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >, dated Sat, 31 Aug 2013, "ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen" <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > writes: >John Wrote: > > > >>The EMC Directive doesn't demand ANY testing. > > > >Maybe, but it demands EVIDENCE of compliance. Annex IV - 1 > > You have quoted extremely selectively. The relevant text is: — evidence of compliance with the harmonised standards, if any, applied in full or in part; — where the manufacturer has not applied harmonised standards, or has applied them only in part, a description and explanation of the steps taken to meet the essential requirements of the Directive, including a description of the electromagnetic compatibility assessment set out in Annex II, point 1, results of design calculations made, examinations carried out, test reports, etc.; In this thread, the point is that IF the new edition does not change anything relevant to the product, no re-test is necessary, and I gave the example of a change in requirements for data ports not affecting a product that doesn't have a data port. It is *dangerous* to apply dictionary definitions to individual words in a Directive, because of the multilingual (one might rather say polyglot) environment in which they are drafted. That's prompted a new sig tag! -- OOO - Own Opinions Only. With best wishes. See www.jmwa.demon.co.uk <http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk> If dictionaries were reliable, we would only need one, because they would all give the same information. John Woodgate, J M Woodgate and Associates, Rayleigh, Essex UK - ---------------------------------------------------------------- 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] <mailto:[email protected]> > All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html <http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html> Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ <http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/> can be used for graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ <http://www.ieee-pses.org/> Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html <http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html> List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html <http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html> For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > Mike Cantwell <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > David Heald: <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > - ---------------------------------------------------------------- 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://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. 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]>
