------ and therefore left to good judgement, even in POHs for certificated aircraft. On that, I suspect we also agree.
Agrajag,
Maybe, maybe not.
The starting point, for US manufacturers (including Boeing) is than an aircraft will be crewed by suitable trained and licensed pilots, and the Operations Manual (by whatever name, FCOM, POH) assumes a level of knowledge and competence for those who will fly their aircraft.
Thus, what is expected to be normal levels of basic aviation knowledge will not be repeated in a POH or similar.
These documents will contain a level of "certified data", and a range of "approved data". Generally but not always, the "certified data" will be in a section called "Limitations". Quite what is what, legally, in an Operations Manual (which will be normally nominated by Manufacturer's Part Number in the Type Certification Data Sheet) doesn't matter, it is a compilation of selected information that is basic to operating the aeroplane.
What you choose to put in your equivalent to a POH is entirely up to you, the mandatory bit is the appendix to your certificate, as issued by whichever delegate issued your Experimental Certificate.
Mostly I do not have a very high opinion of most POH for smaller aircraft, but those manufacturers who have adopted the GAMA format are getting better, particularly if the manufacturer has produced the document in conjunction with Flight Safety Inc.
GAMA is a reasonable format, but it would have been even better if GAMA had followed the format used by the USAF and the USN, and adopted by Boeing, as the (not mandatory) ATA system.
A manual in this format, as a POH, would be really easy to use, it is simple and logical.
Tootle pip!!