Re: [alac] Comments on New TLD Paper
Wendy Seltzer ha scritto: It's high time ICANN stopped questioning questions and get on with it. Well, nothing prevents us from making this the first point of our submission, just to raise the flag once again. Also, a point I would really like to see mentioned is this procedural one: I understand that this was not the intention, but staff should have it very clear that it is not for them to decide what people, and especially ACs, are supposed to be advising about. Of course, the receivers of our advices are free to ignore them, and will likely do so if we start to debate very technical matters, but I would point out that, while encouraging specific ACs to respond with particular care to specific questions is fine, limiting input is not. On the substance of the questions, apart from questioning whether it is still the case to ask whether new TLDs are useful (which I support), I think I have a philosophical objection to 1.c, in the sense that you should not just ask whether the current protocols impose limitations, but also how such limitations (if existing) could be overcome and in which timeframe. In practice, technology should follow policy, and not the opposite, of course after checking that the desired policy is technically feasible. I would also propose to add a 1.e (or 3.d) for consideration, such as "Which pricing policies should be applied to applications (i.e. pay to apply, pay if successful, revenue share...)? Should pricing be different according to the type of application (unrestricted vs restricted, commercial vs non-commercial, developed countries vs developing countries, IDN vs ASCII...)?" (P.S. If anyone needs to re-check what we are being asked, see the message I forwarded to the list on June 21). -- vb. [Vittorio Bertola - v.bertola [a] bertola.eu.org]<----- http://bertola.eu.org/ <- Prima o poi...
|