Hi John and John:
What I have seen is that TCs tend to be myopic. And parochial. And
autonomous. And, at times, decide and proceed regardless whether the subject
complies with engineering and science. And, driven by IEC rules to publish or
lose the work that has been done.
Cooperation between TCs, while encouraged, is dependent on individuals who are
the liaison.
The TCs are comprised of volunteers, who, for the most part, are reluctantly
supported by their employer. For many such volunteers, the work is a “cost
without a benefit” to the employer. Often, the reward is vicarious for the
volunteer.
ACOS attempts to drive the use of basic safety standards. It focuses on the
topics, does not address definitions, and writes some standards itself. And
tends to be all of the above.
The only threat ACOS has is to deny work on a new standard. They are reluctant
to do this as the IEC makes money through the sale of standards.
(The management of TC108 will disagree with my assessment and opinion.)
Rich
-
----------------------------------------------------------------
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://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
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]>
