In message <003f01cea8c7$d1886be0$749943a0$@pctestlab.com>, dated Tue, 3
Sep 2013, Dward <dw...@pctestlab.com> writes:
If nothing in the standard changed the way a previous test was or was
not applied, then no new testing would be required. If however the
standard did change in an area that affected test or test limits, then
in order to still show how it meets the essential requirements of the
directive, retesting would be required.
In all that disingenuous verbiage, the above its the only factual
information. But even that does not cover the case where a requirement
in the standard doesn't apply to a product, because it doesn't have the
port or other feature that the requirement refers to.
--
OOO - Own Opinions Only. With best wishes. See www.jmwa.demon.co.uk
If dictionaries were correct, 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 <emc-p...@ieee.org>
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 <emcp...@radiusnorth.net>
Mike Cantwell <mcantw...@ieee.org>
For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher: <j.bac...@ieee.org>
David Heald: <dhe...@gmail.com>
