Open RobertSpang opened 5 months ago
We find that new fields are needed to cover RSL information, but most likely no master data. We believe only the first line could be translated 1 to 1 into a new field. All other elements should be free text.
General: The declaration of an RSL is mandatory, if all B-modules are declared. Because without all B-modules, the use conditions are not properly defined.
Service Life (Reference Service Life (RSL) or Estimated Service Life (ESL)) mandatory if use stage is declared, only one needs to be selected
Declaration of the source; only 3 valid options:
Declaration of the products service life acc. EN 15804+A2 chapter 7.3.3.2 RSL. The RSL shall be established in accordance with any specific rules given in European product standards or, if not available, a c-PCR, and shall take into account ISO 15686-1, -2, -7 and -8. Where European product standards or a c-PCR provide guidance on deriving the RSL, such guidance shall have priority. The sources have to be indicated.
integer number
contextually mandatory, single occurrence
years; fixed
Service life in years
Service life describes the lifespan of the product.
The value may be estimated by a manufacturer or calculated according to a standard, which then needs to be referenced.
Optional
1
No field needed: This can be done via existence and/or compliance of the reference to some standard. It's RSL if
example markup:
<sl:serviceLife>
<sl:years>50</sl:years>
<sl:referenceToStandard type="source data set" refObjectId="c0016b33-8cf7-415c-ac6e-deba0d21440d" version="00.01.000">
<common:shortDescription>EN15804+A2</common:shortDescription>
</sl:referenceToStandard>
<sl:comment xml:lang="en">The indicated service life requires installation and maintenance according to manufacturer instructions.</sl:comment>
</sl:serviceLife>
I raise this change request because...
Problem description
Solution description
New master datasets need to be created and possibly the format extended
Relevance or added value
High relevance