This whole debate points to a lack in the standards development world that I have lamented for many years (and done something about whenever I could).
THERE IS NO RATIONALE STATEMENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS !!!! Time and again, one butts up against a wall, when one wants to change something, that goes somewhat like, Well those folks must have known what they were doing, and I don't want to change it unless I know why it was so in the first place. Those folks probably did have a rationale, but not necessarily a good one, and not necessarily one that is still valid today. Unless the standard tells me what the rationale was, what it was that they were trying to protect against, I must assume, as a catalyst for change, that it is probably invalid today. Hence, EVERY REQUIREMENT IN A STANDARD OR TECHNICAL REGULATION, MUST HAVE A RATIONALE STATEMENT, OR THE REQUIREMENT SHALL BE DEEMED OUTDATED. Ciao, Vic
