Re: Call for Consensus to Request Member Review of Commerce IG Charter - Please Respond by 19 June

> On Jun 19, 2017, at 3:27 AM, Jean-Yves Rossi <jean-yves.rossi@cantonconsulting.fr> wrote:
> 
> CANTON Consulting supports the proposal and suggests minor amendments:
>  • in 1.1 Liaise : "regulatory bodies" instead of "regulatory agencies" (the word "Agency" is quite specific to the US organization)
>  •  In part 2. : we similarly suggest to change "regulatory bodies, (...) and central banks" in " standards bodies, regulatory agencies, 
> 
>  consumer groups, and trade organizations. Examples include EMVCo, the PCI Security Council, ISO 20022 and other committees, the FIDO Alliance, GSMA, GS1, UN/CEFACT, and regulatory bodies (agencies, central banks, ...) "
> (BTW, there no reason why central banks should be in the scope, besides being in charge to regulate payment activity)

Hi Jean-Yves,

I have changed “agencies” to “agencies/bodies” in the hopes of resonating with more people. If that is cumbersome, I have
no objection to simplifying it to “bodies.” (However, I note that the EBA Web site [1] says it is "An agency of the European Union.”)

Regarding your other change, I did not add “regulatory bodies (agencies, central banks, …)” because "regulatory agencies/bodies”
are listed earlier in the bullet item. I did add, however, US Federal Reserve and EBA.

Let me know if that works for you. Thanks!

Ian

[1] http://www.eba.europa.eu/

--
Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
https://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs/
Tel: +1 718 260 9447

Received on Monday, 19 June 2017 16:18:29 UTC