<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
[bc-gnso] Last Call: BC Position on New TLD Registry Agreement Amendments DAG v3
- To: <bc-GNSO@xxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: [bc-gnso] Last Call: BC Position on New TLD Registry Agreement Amendments DAG v3
- From: "Philip Sheppard" <philip.sheppard@xxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2010 09:27:33 +0200
Steve,
AIM supports this.
It may be helpful - in keeping with past BC papers - to separate by subtitles -
the factual background information and the BC position.
Your text already does this. Just a question of a couple of sub-titles I
believe. BC opinion starts at the paragraph "Therefore ICANN shouldn't..."
Philip
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|