Where does it say in the regs...?

[Lucien Nunes]

Is it my imagination or are we seeing a ridiculous number of threads with this kind of question? Sure, some are just trolling, but many of them look like genuine queries where people want to know a the number of the reg that says whether it's OK to install 2.5T+E clipped direct to some 4x2 to feed a socket near the sideboard at No.37 Acacia Grove on a Tuesday?

What does this tell us? That the regs need to be more prescriptive like the NEC? That courses need to teach more about understanding electricity and less about looking up facts in a book? Or has it always been like this?

Puzzled of London.

 

[Sisyphus]

I dont think this is just in the electrical industry Lucien. As a nurse I have many written policies that I have to adhere to for pretty much any situation. My style of nursing doesn't fit well with this as I make sure I put the patient first, I think about the patient and what they require. I follow the policies if I can but they are not my priority, as a result I used to get a telling off every so often (by a poor manager) as I haven't followed the policy to the letter, however my patient is well looked after.

The newly qualified nurses will try and stick to the many, many policies (which would take forever to read as theres hundreds of them) and I believe this is to the detriment of the patient.

I'm only saying this as I expect these 'policies', 'rule books', 'regulations' are in most fields of work and they are becoming more prevalent as we become more 'safety conscious' and more accountable for our work. To a newly qualified nurse, electrician etc they may well be fearful of stepping outside of the 'rule book'. Perhaps it is mainly the newly qualified and inexperienced as I am very comfortable with my style of nursing and I have a deep understanding of the subject therefore I dont mind ignoring policies as I see what is best for the patient, however I am an inexperienced electrical installer and haven't got the same insight, therefore knowledge or confidence to step outside of the regs.

.... So basically, instead of those 3 wordy paragraphs I could have just said "Do a proper course!"

Equating physiology to physics is a nefarious task at best HippyDad

Body chemistry is unique , one's approach would be also

The physics of electricity are not , it is only our approach that changes

~S~

 

[Gardner]

It is public. However, it's not free.

How many other publications and standards relating to 'public safety' do you think should be provided free of charge, and who's going to pay for the cost of producing them?

My understanding is that in the US anything mandated into law must be disclosed. Further the NFPA who writes the American NEC advocates and allows for free access:

Free access NFPA codes and standards

This shows that such a system can exist without trouble.

Why don't you try getting your facts straight before you go spouting off this nonsense?
BS7671, along with every BS, may be viewed by anyone at no cost at any public library.
That's hardly 'not made public in any way, shape or form' is it?

But imo it makes it an inconvenience, and, my big peeve is that the book can not be quoted from directly online.

 

[davesparks]

My understanding is that in the US anything mandated into law must be disclosed. Further the NFPA who writes the American NEC advocates and allows for free access:

Free access NFPA codes and standards

This shows that such a system can exist without trouble.





But imo it makes it an inconvenience, and, my big peeve is that the book can not be quoted from directly online.

But who pays for it? You can't tell me the publishers provide the paper, ink, printers etc for free? Or the people who actually write the regs do it all out of the goodness of their hearts?
My understanding is that the merkin regs are pretty much paid for by the manufacturers who benefit from the use of their products being mandated in the regs.

The book can, and often is, quoted here and elsewhere.

 

[hightower]

Under what is this delusion people seem to have about not being able to post excerpts from copyrighted material based?

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/exceptions-to-copyright

Yes, it IS legal to post quotes from BS7671 on this site, and it happens quite often.

 

[Gardner]

But who pays for it? You can't tell me the publishers provide the paper, ink, printers etc for free? Or the people who actually write the regs do it all out of the goodness of their hearts?
My understanding is that the merkin regs are pretty much paid for by the manufacturers who benefit from the use of their products being mandated in the regs.

The book can, and often is, quoted here and elsewhere.

They simply scan and down load them online as a PDF file which anyone can access. The physical book still costs $100 (90 euro).


I still can not take screen shots of BS7671 and post them here, or a lengthy direct copy and paste.

 

[Gardner]

Under what is this delusion people seem to have about not being able to post excerpts from copyrighted material based?

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/exceptions-to-copyright

Yes, it IS legal to post quotes from BS7671 on this site, and it happens quite often.

Ive had mods edit me on other forums. I once tried to help out "DIY not" and the mods deleted by direct quotes of the regs saying it was copyright.

 

[ruston]

Yes , I think if I remember correctly it was allowed as a teaching aid.

 

[Gardner]

My understanding is that the merkin regs are pretty much paid for by the manufacturers who benefit from the use of their products being mandated in the regs.

Oh, forgot to add. I think I agree with you on this one, but not entirely... With metal consumer units and AFDDs soon to come it looks like BS7671 has already been bought out.

 

[hightower]

Yes , I think if I remember correctly it was allowed as a teaching aid.

That would be one reason, pretty sure it could fall under a couple of categories such as critiquing too.

Ive had mods edit me on other forums. I once tried to help out "DIY not" and the mods deleted by direct quotes of the regs saying it was copyright.

Well, the mods who do such are wrong. Posting a regulation would not bring a forum into disrepute. Posting the whole of Chapter 53 of BS7671 would.

 

[davesparks]

Ive had mods edit me on other forums. I once tried to help out "DIY not" and the mods deleted by direct quotes of the regs saying it was copyright.

So what? Moderators on a forum are unlikely to be legal professionals specialising in copyright law, they were far more likely to be working on second hand information from Chinese whispers.
Can you provide any believeable proof of this copyright rule your are talking about?

I've posted many quotes and images of the regs on here and elsewhere and so far I've not been prosecuted or reprimanded in any way.

 

[Gardner]

That would be one reason, pretty sure it could fall under a couple of categories such as critiquing too.



Well, the mods who do such are wrong. Posting a regulation would not bring a forum into disrepute. Posting the whole of Chapter 53 of BS7671 would.

It was just one page, but it got them upset enough.

 

[Gardner]

So what? Moderators on a forum are unlikely to be legal professionals specialising in copyright law, they were far more likely to be working on second hand information from Chinese whispers.
Can you provide any believeable proof of this copyright rule your are talking about?

I've posted many quotes and images of the regs on here and elsewhere and so far I've not been prosecuted or reprimanded in any way.

Question, can I post a link to the regs?

 

[hightower]

It was just one page, but it got them upset enough.

Was a page needed? You should only post up what you need to clarify/discuss. So posting a page of a dozen or so regs when you are discussing a single regulation could be deemed inappropriate and a breach of copyright.

 

[davesparks]

Question, can I post a link to the regs?

What do you mean by a link to it?

 

[Gardner]

What do you mean by a link to it?

To the PDF. Id imagine I can't, which is one of the things I am talking about.