In message <79b6babf7ce2914591e1c45c7ed086fa0c9...@chiefwiggum.nceelabs.org>, dated Thu, 20 Nov 2008, Doug Kramer <dkra...@nceelabs.com> writes:
>I would contend that it is any component of a system where the removal >or substitution could change the compliance of the product relative to >the applicable safety standard. That's it. As long as 'could' isn't interpreted as 'could, even with infinitesimal probability'. The term seems not to be used in IEC standards but was much used by test-houses in the third-party testing (SEMKO etc.) era. -- OOO - Own Opinions Only. Try www.jmwa.demon.co.uk and www.isce.org.uk Either we are causing global warming, in which case we may be able to stop it, or natural variation is causing it, and we probably can't stop it. You choose! 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 <emc-p...@ieee.org> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc 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 <emcp...@ptcnh.net> Mike Cantwell <mcantw...@ieee.org> For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: <j.bac...@ieee.org> David Heald: <dhe...@gmail.com>
