- Location
- Mission Viejo, CA
- Occupation
- Professional Electrical Engineer
In Section 1.1 the stated purpose of the NEC Manual of Style (MoS) is:
Never the less, I?m fairly sure most of us agree the NEC still has a way to go ? if it were "clear, usable, and unambiguous" this would be a much smaller community.
Over the years, I?ve developed some personal, informal rules on how the NEC should be interpreted such as, ?A sub-section must be interpreted in light of its primary section? or ?A section must be interpreted in light of the scope of its Article.? I?ve seen too many people jump on a single sentence ? even a phrase ? often unrelated to the subject and totally misconstrue the intent.
Has anyone seen a formal set of ?Rules of Interpretation?? In 35 years, designing projects in over 100 distinct jurisdictions nationwide (and over 25 international ones) I?ve never seen one.
Personally I believe that that?is indeed the intent of the MoS. A good example of this, is the attempt to make exceptions ?positive text? and if exceptions are still necessary locating them such that it is clear where they apply.
Never the less, I?m fairly sure most of us agree the NEC still has a way to go ? if it were "clear, usable, and unambiguous" this would be a much smaller community.
Over the years, I?ve developed some personal, informal rules on how the NEC should be interpreted such as, ?A sub-section must be interpreted in light of its primary section? or ?A section must be interpreted in light of the scope of its Article.? I?ve seen too many people jump on a single sentence ? even a phrase ? often unrelated to the subject and totally misconstrue the intent.
Has anyone seen a formal set of ?Rules of Interpretation?? In 35 years, designing projects in over 100 distinct jurisdictions nationwide (and over 25 international ones) I?ve never seen one.
