Sounds super interesting. I wish they made it more accessible, by f.e in their rationale either writing out or linking the many acronyms that I assume are from EUCC, and might not be immediately known to everybody.
--
Dr. Florian Idelberger
Karlsruher Institut für Technologie (KIT)
Zentrum für Angewandte Rechtswissenschaft (ZAR)
Institut für Informations- und Wirtschaftsrecht
Vincenz-Prießnitz-Str. 3, D-76131 Karlsruhe
E-Mail: florian.idelberger@xxxxxxx
KIT - Universität des Landes Baden-Württemberg und
nationales Forschungszentrum in der Helmholtz-Gemeinschaft
Am 11.09.2025 um 11:48 schrieb Juan Rico via open-regulatory-compliance <open-regulatory-compliance@xxxxxxxxxxx>:
Hi Roman and all,
I spoke with the author about the approach this morning, and I agree it’s a good topic to bring to the community for discussion. I can invite him to one of our SIG meetings, or we could organise a CRA Monday session focused on it.
Best regards,
Juan
Hi folks,
I'm not sure how many of you have seen this work
https://github.com/sCC4CRA/, but this is a brave and nice attempt to flush out a guide for Module A (self-assessment) for Default category PDEs, by making it "the most looking-like" EUCC. I don't necessarily agree with the "certification" anchor and terms,
but I think we may want to discuss it at the next ORC meeting to get some learnings, at minimum, as we work on our Whitepapers.
Cheers,
_______________________________________________
open-regulatory-compliance mailing list
open-regulatory-compliance@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://accounts.eclipse.org
_______________________________________________
open-regulatory-compliance mailing list
open-regulatory-compliance@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://accounts.eclipse.org
|
