One oddity I noticed in the BOB, that while existing Roman numerals (i) (ii) (iv) etc.for sub-paragraphs have been changed to Latin Letters (a) (b) etc. - on other places things that were previously bulleted lists have been changed to use Roman numerals (e.g. the NOTE to 527.2.4).
Does anyone know the underlying thinking?
- Andy.
I noticed that. It is simply a change to indenting.
GK will be along soon, but in the mean time, I suggest that harmonization might be something to do with it.
ETA, it may make it easier to refer to the text: e.g., "123.4.5 (a) (iii)" is probably better than "third bullet point to ...". Although the indents in 642.3 now have two styles of bullet point instead of roman numeral > letter > roman numeral > squares, so perhaps that does not explain it.
One oddity I noticed in the BOB, that while existing Roman numerals (i) (ii) (iv) etc.for sub-paragraphs have been changed to Latin Letters (a) (b) etc. - on other places things that were previously bulleted lists have been changed to use Roman numerals (e.g. the NOTE to 527.2.4).
Does anyone know the underlying thinking?
Simply following BSI Rules for the structure and drafting of UK standards, which was updated in 2022.
For an Amendment, it would not be correct to re-write the whole standard, only update the text that is agreed to change. So we couldn't carte blanche adopt the whole of the new rules for this update, as this would mean a substantial re-write of the whole book.
But, with modern publishing technology, this is merely a formatting change that is applied at the 'push of a button' as it were, without a re-write of the actual content.
It's also worth noting that, as we move forward with the standard, it may be that the IEC rules (IEC Directives Part 2) are followed for parts of the standard that are necessarily adopted from international work because of the UK's agreements with CENELEC.
If that is the case, consistency will need to be maintained across BS 7671; there are some differences between BSI's UK rules and the IEC Directives Part 2. At the moment, we have a mixture of old and new UK rules, and old and new IEC rules, throughout the wording in provisions of the standard.
While we have Mr K’s attention, might I also enquire how to properly refer to the regulation Andy mentioned? Should it be five two seven dot two dot four, thereby emphasising the part, chapter, section, sub-section and regulation? I do recall an IEE video of the distant past being very explicit in that regard.
Hi lyledunn , yes, 'five two seven dot two dot four' is the convention we used, although strictly if you wanted to emphasise the CHAPTER, it would be 'fifty two', but this isn't part of the Regulation number.
The convention for Regulation numbering is <section>.<subsection>.<number>, although there can be a number of levels of sub-section, so we have Regulations such as 531.3.5.3.1 (five three one dot three dot five dot three dot one.
In Part 7, there are no Chapters only Sections. In particular, if you delete the part 7 section and first dot, if there is a Regulation in Parts 1 to 6 or Part 8 with the same number, the Part 7 Regulation replaces the one in the other parts for that location only. For example, Regulation 701.411.3.3 replaces Regulation 411.3.3 in locations within the scope of Section 701.
We're about to take you to the IET registration website. Don't worry though, you'll be sent straight back to the community after completing the registration.
Continue to the IET registration site
