That standard it is referencing a standard that is no longer "state of the art" with regard to several sets of limits or frequency ranges. The chair of the ETSI committee is aware of that problem, and proposed I described. The discussion also considered that the purpose of standards is to support Declaration to a Directive, and not certification to the standard itself.
Manufacturers also, of course, have to deal with reality of market surveillance which seems to operate a slightly simplistic "current Harmonised Standard = good / non-current HS = bad" approach. Regards Charlie -----Original Message----- From: John Woodgate [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 20 July 2015 22:15 To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [PSES] R&TTE OJ listing vs conflicting Reference Standards in EN 301 489-1 v1.9.2 In message <[email protected]>, dated Mon, 20 Jul 2015, Charlie Blackham <[email protected]> writes: >The discussion concluded that whilst final responsibility would always >rest with the manufacturer (and Notified Body if used), that using the >latest state of the art standard would be perfectly acceptable or >perhaps even the better decision. > > The committee that wrote the referencing standard decided to use dated references, and that was voted on and accepted. So how can it be a 'better decision' to ignore that? While the advantages of dated and undated references are pretty evenly balanced, the main point in favour of dating is that the user ***is in no doubt which edition of the reference standard to apply***. Teaching people to disregard that seems extremely perverse. -- OOO - Own Opinions Only. With best wishes. See www.jmwa.demon.co.uk When I turn my back on the sun, it's to look for a rainbow 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]> 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]> - ---------------------------------------------------------------- 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]>
