IECEx TRF identifiers don't have `v{n}` info (which is correct, but not in our implementation)

ronaldtse commented 2 years ago

IECEE TRF 60335-2-2M:2019

This identifier means that the underlying document is IEC 60335-2-2, TRF version M. According to OD-010-1, the edition of IEC 60335-2-2 should be specified, as “v{n}”, where {n} is the edition number. This type of identifier is missing the edition. (if compliant it should be something like "IECEE TRF 60335-2-2v1M:2019”)

Some others: IECEE TRF 60335-2-6,102G:2018 (#56 ) IECEE TRF 80601-2-35B:2016 IECEE TRF 60044-1A:2010 IECEE TRF 60044-7B:2018 IECEE TRF 60044-8B:2018 IECEE TRF 60065N:2018 IECEE TRF 60065K:2010 IECEE TRF 60065J:2010 IECEE TRF 60065I:2008 IECEE TRF 60065E:2004 IECEE TRF 60065D:2002

For these, we will not set the "edition number" of the underlying standard.

mico commented 2 years ago

@ronaldtse

This identifier means that the underlying document is IEC 60335-2-2, TRF version M. According to OD-010-1, the edition of IEC 60335-2-2 should be specified, as “v{n}”, where {n} is the edition number. This type of identifier is missing the edition. (if compliant it should be something like "IECEE TRF 60335-2-2v1M:2019”)

Cannot find where edition mentioned as “v{n}”, in OD-010-1 I found:

The example below would be the TRF number for a new blank ExTR document for IEC 60079-6, 3rd edition. ExTR60079-6_3A

On the website it's edition 12.0 (https://webstore.iec.ch/publication/65730) I don't understand why we need to add edition here.

ronaldtse commented 2 years ago

@mico there is a misunderstanding in what the "edition 12.0" means here. Edition 12 of the TRF (not the underlying standard) means version "M" (actually M is the 13th letter... not sure why).

When I said "edition number", I meant that of the underlying standard:

IECEE TRF 60335-2-2M:2019 This Test Report Form applies to: IEC 60335-2-2:2019 with IEC 60335-1:2010, IEC 60335-1:2010/AMD1:2013, IEC 60335-1:2010/AMD2:2016

Here the underlying standard is IEC 60335-2-2: https://webstore.iec.ch/publication/61319

Which is Edition 7.

According to OD-010-1:

Notice the last two fields:

Arabic number reflecting the edition of the IEC standard; followed by (<==== this is the edition number of the underlying standard)
Uppercase letter indicating the version of the ExTR document. (<==== this is the version number of the TRF document)

So the "3" in "ExTR60079-6_3A" means "IEC 60079-6 edition 3", and TRF version A.

You are correct that the "v{n}" syntax is not specified in OD-010-1. It is however used in some other TRFs. I was wrong to assume that "v{n}" is used for all, and in fact, OD-010-1 is for "IECEx" TRFs, not "IECEE" TRFs. This was another thing I was wrong to assume.

IECEx stands for "IEC System for Certification to Standards relating to Equipment for use in Explosive Atmospheres"
IECEE stands for "IEC System of Conformity Assessment Schemes for Electrotechnical Equipment and Components"

In any case, I found the list of IECEE TRF numbers on iecee.org (which is the authoritative site): https://www.iecee.org/dyn/www/f?p=106:61:0:::::

But the identifiers shown are somewhat different from webstore.iec.ch (even though iecee.org links to webstore.iec.ch), e.g. "IEC60227_3D" vs "IEC 60227-3D".

I don't understand why we need to add edition here.

I agree. For the document identifiers that have edition of the underlying standard, we include it. If not, we don't include them.

Notice that:

"IECEx TRF" typically includes the edition number as "v{n}":

IECEx TRF 16852v2A:2017
IECEx TRF 16852v1arev:2015
IECEx TRF 60079-0v7c_ds:2021
IECEx TRF 60079-0v7B_ds:2018

"IECEE TRF" do not:

IECEE TRF 60034-2-1A:2016
IECEE TRF 60044-1A:2010
IECEE TRF 60044-7B:2018
IECEE TRF 60044-8B:2018

mico commented 2 years ago

@ronaldtse do we still need to update identifiers to include version?

IECEE TRF 60335-2-2M:2019 should become IECEE TRF 60335-2-2-1M:2019?

ronaldtse commented 2 years ago

do we still need to update identifiers to include version? IECEE TRF 60335-2-2M:2019 should become IECEE TRF 60335-2-2-1M:2019?

@mico no we don't need to, for the IECEE document identifiers.

ronaldtse commented 2 years ago

I think it might be better to separate the parsing of "IECEE" identifiers vs "IECEx" identifiers?

ronaldtse commented 2 years ago

From IECEE:

Secretariat reply: IECEE TRFs are not developed as per the IECEx OD-010-1. The OD that applies is the IECEE OD-2020. You can find it here: https://www.iecee.org/documents/refdocs/

We do not use “v{n}”, although in general the IEC Webstore edition number will match up with our IECEE internal numbering A, B, C, etc., this may not always be the case for historical reasons, as TRFs were generated and used in our system before they were made available through the IEC webstore.

So these TRF identifiers are correct to not have "v{n}" (which is only used in IECEx TRFs).

ronaldtse commented 2 years ago

This topic is now handled under #78 .

ronaldtse commented 2 years ago

Closed since #78 is closed.

metanorma / pubid-iec

IECEx TRF identifiers don't have `v{n}` info (which is correct, but not in our implementation) #73