Re: ACTION-265

Why would you use "commercially reasonable" rather than just "reasonable'?

----------
John M. Simpson
Consumer Advocate
Consumer Watchdog
2701 Ocean Park Blvd., Suite 112
Santa Monica, CA,90405
Tel: 310-392-7041
Cell: 310-292-1902
www.ConsumerWatchdog.org
john@consumerwatchdog.org

On Oct 17, 2012, at 11:45 AM, Shane Wiley wrote:

> Depends on the scale and nature of the problem – each company would need to be able to defend their reaction time, approach, priority, and effort to rectify the situation.  If it’s a very small problem, then I would expect the response to be swift (days/weeks).  If it’s a larger problem, it may make more time to address the situation (new code release, data clean up cycles).  The important items are that the issue has been identified and the company has committed to rectifying the situation.
>  
> - Shane
>  
> From: John Simpson [mailto:john@consumerwatchdog.org] 
> Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2012 11:18 AM
> To: Shane Wiley
> Cc: public-tracking@w3.org
> Subject: Re: ACTION-265
>  
> Shane,
>  
> A clarifying question:  Could you please give a rough idea of how long a "commercially reasonable time" would be?
>  
> Thanks,
> John
>  
> ----------
> John M. Simpson
> Consumer Advocate
> Consumer Watchdog
> 2701 Ocean Park Blvd., Suite 112
> Santa Monica, CA,90405
> Tel: 310-392-7041
> Cell: 310-292-1902
> www.ConsumerWatchdog.org
> john@consumerwatchdog.org
>  
> On Oct 16, 2012, at 9:58 PM, Shane Wiley wrote:
> 
> 
> Updated text per our discussions in Amsterdam.
>  
> Tracking Compliance and Scope
> Section 3.8.1
>  
> It may happen that a party claiming compliance with this standard will retain or use data without awareness that it is doing so contrary to its intended party position with respect to the standard. In such a case, the party must bring its practices and prior collected data into compliance with the standard within a commercially reasonable time after it learns of such non-compliant activity.
>  
>