Some also make it easy to integrate fulltext keyword search for any text within an XML document. These features allow us to build highly specific search functions that have high quality search features that can be easily customized by non-programmers. Because XML description tags can be embedded directly into AnyChart files, this means that even full-text keyword searches can be used with AnyChart.
Central to the measurements of search quality is the improvement of both search precision getting the documents you want and relevancy avoiding hits on the documents you are not interested in finding. By using customized search forms that allow us to do keyword search as well as adding element-level specification, we have found that our users can find the right sample chart usually in the first 10 search results. This means that they do not quickly give up and start creating a new chart from scratch that has already been created. This feature is central to our high-reuse strategy and lower cost per new chart development.
AnyChart provides a large amount of high-quality on-line documentation and example charts on its own web site that can be searched with search engines like Google. However, this documentation is not integrated into our local XML content management system, and the search tools frequently do not find the appropriate documents.
EUR-Lex - D - ES - EUR-Lex
By integrating documentation on requirements, testing, quality, and policy into a single search engine, all the related documentation can be found using a single search function. There are many aspects to chart quality that should be reviewed by a human factors and user experience team. In the past many of these checks were manual and could only be done after charts were being used in a production setting.
For example, many charts are used to find specific patterns in large data sets. Disabling chart borders and grids should be automatically checked by the system. These checks can now be done automatically by the system as the chart is being developed. Large organizations may have a large number of business rules to help users see consistent charts in consistent ways.
For example, an organization may decide that all time-series charts should display dates across the horizontal axis using a 90 degree rotation for the date text. To perform this check, a simple XQuery can be quickly created using a template XQuery application.
The user only needs to have a sample consistency check template and have an XPath expression to extract the correct data. Adding additional user-defined value columns is very complex in many relational database systems. So, for example, we can add additional chart metadata that describes who requested the chart, who approved the design, when the chart went into production etc.
This allows us to store all of our chart data in a single document in our version control systems. As we created advanced chart libraries, we found that many charts share common elements. In many cases the XML fragments also needed to be parameterized with elements such as custom titles and labels. XQuery functions allow the user to pass these parameters in using a simple inheritance process, much like object oriented systems. Many articles have been written about the need for business to quickly respond to changing business requirements.
We have found that the combination of AnyChart and XQuery allows our team to quickly add new functionality or change functionally without re-building our core framework of tools. Our approach also makes it easier for new staff to quickly become productive without having to learn the details of how these systems work. Using XForms and native XML systems allows us to quickly build forms for gathering new chart requests and updating chart development status.
This simple clean architecture avoids many of the complexities of using objects and relational databases and is considered one of the key factors that allow a higher participation of non-programmers. When an organisation has withdrawn from the EU-U. Privacy Shield, fails to re-certify or is removed from the Privacy Shield List, the Department of Commerce will on an on-going basis verify that it has deleted from its published privacy policy any references to the Privacy Shield that imply its continued participation and, if it continues to make false claims, refer the matter to the FTC, Department of Transportation or other competent authority for possible enforcement action.
It will also send questionnaires to organisations whose self-certifications lapse or that have voluntarily withdrawn from the EU-U. Privacy Shield to verify whether the organisation will return, delete or continue to apply the Privacy Principles to the personal data that they received while participating in the EU-U. Privacy Shield and, if personal data are to be retained, verify who within the organisation will serve as an ongoing contact point for Privacy Shield-related questions. On an ongoing basis, the Department of Commerce will conduct ex officio compliance reviews 38 of self-certified organisations, including through sending detailed questionnaires.
It will also systematically carry out reviews whenever it has received a specific non-frivolous complaint, when an organisation does not provide satisfactory responses to its enquiries, or when there is credible evidence suggesting that an organisation may not be complying with the Principles.
- Samsung Galaxy S5?
- Learn How to Hack the Location Of a Cell Phone.
- Everything You Should Know About Your IMEI Number;
- HTC Batteries!
Where appropriate, the Department of Commerce will also consult with DPAs about such compliance reviews. Redress mechanisms, complaint handling and enforcement. Privacy Shield, through the Recourse, Enforcement and Liability Principle, requires organisations to provide recourse for individuals who are affected by non-compliance and thus the possibility for EU data subjects to lodge complaints regarding non-compliance by U.
As part of their self-certification, organisations must satisfy the requirements of the Recourse, Enforcement and Liability Principle by providing for effective and readily available independent recourse mechanisms by which each individual's complaints and disputes can be investigated and expeditiously resolved at no cost to the individual. Organisations may choose independent recourse mechanisms in either the Union or in the United States. However, no such choice exists where organisations process human resources data as cooperation with the DPAs is then mandatory.
Other alternatives include independent Alternative Dispute Resolution ADR or private-sector developed privacy programs that incorporate the Privacy Principles into their rules. The latter must include effective enforcement mechanisms in accordance with the requirements of the Recourse, Enforcement and Liability Principle. Organisations are obliged to remedy any problems of non-compliance.
Executive Summary
They must also specify that they are subject to the investigatory and enforcement powers of the FTC, the Department of Transportation or any other U. Consequently, the Privacy Shield framework provides data subjects with a number of possibilities to enforce their rights, lodge complaints regarding non-compliance by U. Individuals can bring a complaint directly to an organisation, to an independent dispute resolution body designated by the organisation, to national DPAs or to the FTC. In cases where their complaints have not been resolved by any of these recourse or enforcement mechanisms, individuals also have a right to invoke binding arbitration under the Privacy Shield Panel Annex 1 of Annex II of this decision.
Except for the arbitral panel, which requires certain remedies to be exhausted before it can be invoked, individuals are free to pursue any or all of the redress mechanism of their choice, and are not obliged to choose one mechanism over the other or to follow a specific sequence. However, there is a certain logical order that is advisable to follow, as set out below.
First, EU data subjects may pursue cases of non-compliance with the Principles through direct contacts with the U. To facilitate resolution, the organisation must put in place an effective redress mechanism to deal with such complaints. An organisation's privacy policy must therefore clearly inform individuals about a contact point, either within or outside the organisation, that will handle complaints including any relevant establishment in the Union that can respond to inquiries or complaints and about the independent complaint handling mechanisms.
Upon receipt of an individual's complaint, directly from the individual or through the Department of Commerce following referral by a DPA, the organisation must provide a response to the EU data subject within a period of 45 days. This response must include an assessment of the merits of the complaint and information as to how the organisation will rectify the problem. Likewise, organisations are required to respond promptly to inquiries and other requests for information from the Department of Commerce or from a DPA 39 where the organisation has committed to cooperate with the DPA relating to their adherence to the Principles.
Organisations must retain their records on the implementation of their privacy policies and make them available upon request to an independent recourse mechanism or the FTC or other U. Second, individuals can also bring a complaint directly to the independent dispute resolution body either in the United States or in the Union designated by an organisation to investigate and resolve individual complaints unless they are obviously unfounded or frivolous and to provide appropriate recourse free of charge to the individual.
Independent dispute resolution bodies designated by an organisation will be required to include on their public websites relevant information regarding the EU-U. Privacy Shield and the services they provide under it. Each year, they must publish an annual report providing aggregate statistics regarding these services As part of its compliance review procedures, the Department of Commerce will verify that self-certified U. Both the organisations and the responsible independent recourse mechanisms are required to respond promptly to inquiries and requests by the Department of Commerce for information relating to the Privacy Shield.
In cases where the organisation fails to comply with the ruling of a dispute resolution or self-regulatory body, the latter must notify such non-compliance to the Department of Commerce and the FTC or other U. If an organisation refuses to comply with a final determination by any privacy self-regulatory, independent dispute resolution or government body or where such a body determines that an organisation frequently fails to comply with the Principles, this will be considered as a persistent failure to comply with the result that the Department of Commerce, after first providing 30 days' notice and an opportunity to respond to the organization that has failed to comply, will strike the organisation off the list If, after removal from the list, the organisation continues to make the claim of Privacy Shield certification, the Department will refer it to the FTC or other enforcement agency Third, individuals may also bring their complaints to a national Data Protection Authority.
Organisations are obliged to cooperate in the investigation and the resolution of a complaint by a DPA either when it concerns the processing of human resources data collected in the context of an employment relationship or when the respective organisation has voluntarily submitted to the oversight by DPAs. Notably, organisations have to respond to inquiries, comply with the advice given by the DPA, including for remedial or compensatory measures, and provide the DPA with written confirmation that such action has been taken.
The advice of the DPAs will be delivered through an informal panel of DPAs established at Union level 44 , which will help to ensure a harmonised and coherent approach to a particular complaint. Advice will be issued after both sides in the dispute have had a reasonable opportunity to comment and to provide any evidence they wish.
What's New
The panel will deliver advice as quickly as the requirement for due process allows, and as a general rule within 60 days after receiving a complaint. If an organisation fails to comply within 25 days of delivery of the advice and has offered no satisfactory explanation for the delay, the panel will give notice of its intention either to submit the matter to the FTC or other competent U. In the first alternative, this may lead to enforcement action based on Section 5 of the FTC Act or similar statute. In the second alternative, the panel will inform the Department of Commerce which will consider the organisation's refusal to comply with the advice of the DPA panel as a persistent failure to comply that will lead to the organisation's removal from the Privacy Shield List.
If the DPA to which the complaint has been addressed has taken no or insufficient action to address a complaint, the individual complainant has the possibility to challenge such in- action in the national courts of the respective Member State. Individuals may also bring complaints to DPAs even when the DPA panel has not been designated as an organisation's dispute resolution body. In order to facilitate and increase cooperation on matters relating to individual complaints and non-compliance by Privacy Shield organisations, the Department of Commerce will establish a dedicated contact point to act as a liaison and to assist with DPA inquiries regarding an organisation's compliance with the Principles Likewise, the FTC has committed to establish a dedicated point of contact 46 and provide the DPAs with investigatory assistance pursuant to the U.
Fourth, the Department of Commerce has committed to receive, review and undertake best efforts to resolve complaints about an organisation's non-compliance with the Principles. To this end, the Department of Commerce provides special procedures for DPAs to refer complaints to a dedicated contact point, track them and follow up with companies to facilitate resolution. In order to expedite the processing of individual complaints, the contact point will liaise directly with the respective DPA on compliance issues and in particular update it on the status of complaints within a period of not more than 90 days following referral.
HTC Batteries
This allows data subjects to bring complaints of non-compliance by U. The Department of Commerce has also committed to provide, in the annual review of the functioning of the EU-U. Privacy Shield, a report that analyses in aggregate form the complaints it receives each year Where, on the basis of its ex officio verifications, complaints or any other information, the Department of Commerce concludes that an organisation has persistently failed to comply with the Privacy Principles it will remove such an organisation from the Privacy Shield list.
Refusal to comply with a final determination by any privacy self-regulatory, independent dispute resolution or government body, including a DPA, will be regarded as a persistent failure to comply. Fifth, a Privacy Shield organisation must be subject to the investigatory and enforcement powers of the U.
The FTC will give priority consideration to referrals of non-compliance with the Privacy Principles received from independent dispute resolution or self-regulatory bodies, the Department of Commerce and DPAs acting on their own initiative or upon complaints to determine whether Section 5 of the FTC Act has been violated The FTC has committed to create a standardised referral process, to designate a point of contact at the agency for DPA referrals, and to exchange information on referrals.
In addition, it will accept complaints directly from individuals and will undertake Privacy Shield investigations on its own initiative, in particular as part of its wider investigations of privacy issues. Where organisations fail to comply, the FTC may refer the case to the competent court in order to seek civil penalties and other remedies, including for any injury caused by the unlawful conduct. Alternatively, the FTC may directly seek a preliminary or permanent injunction or other remedies from a federal court.
Each consent order issued to a Privacy Shield organisation will have self-reporting provisions 51 , and organisations will be required to make public any relevant Privacy Shield-related sections of any compliance or assessment report submitted to the FTC. Organisations must inform individuals about their possibility, under certain conditions, to invoke binding arbitration and they are obliged to respond once an individual has invoked this option by delivering notice to the concerned organisation This arbitral panel will consist of a pool of at least 20 arbitrators designated by the Department of Commerce and the Commission based on their independence, integrity, as well as experience in U.
For each individual dispute, the parties will select from this pool a panel of one or three 53 arbitrators. The proceedings will be governed by standard arbitration rules to be agreed between the Department of Commerce and the Commission.