Thanks. They are of course vague as they are general rules (the label would be fixed on a number of electrical assemblies). However, I would appreciate a comment on the quality of the language. Would an English speaking electrician find them weird? Or is it normal language.

I hope somebody can comment on this question.

The translation which is used where I work:

1. Disconnect completely

2. Secure against re-connection

3. Verify that the installation is dead

4. Carry out earthing and short-circuiting

5. Provide protection against adjacent live parts

It doesn't matter whether they are general rules or any other sort of rule--vague is never good, assuming the reader actually needs to know what is meant.

I assume you meant "Of course they are brief as they are general rules." Brief is admirable, especially in general rules, but vague is not.

So, when I said that they are "vague, incomplete statements," I was indeed commenting on the quality of the language. I certainly did not mean that characterization as a compliment.

"Grounding" is American and "earthing" is British. If the equipment is to be used in Europe as well as America, I would include both terms (one in parenthesis.)

Also, in number 4, I think the term "phases" shouldn't be dropped. One suggestion:

4. Short-circuit and ground (earth) all phases