[gnso-ccwg-dt] RESEND re: Revised Draft Principles/Next Call
All, It seems like the Word document may have been corrupted in transit. I’m resending it. Thanks, Julie On 11/22/11 5:07 PM, "Julie Hedlund" <julie.hedlund@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: All, Here are some brief notes from today’s call concerning the revisions to the Draft Principles. The revised document is attached in Word and PDF and also is posted to the wiki at https://community.icann.org/display/gnsoccwgdraftteam/5.+Background+Documents. The redline/tracked changes indicate those changes that were suggested during the call or immediately after. Please let me know if you have any questions. Your additional edits to the document are welcome and encouraged! Our next call is scheduled for Tuesday, 06 December at UTC/1200 PST/1500 EST/2000 London/2100 CET. A reminder will be send prior to the call. Best regards, Julie Attendees: Jonathan Robinson (Chair), Chuck Gomes Alan Greenberg, Mikey O’Conner, Wendy Seltzer, Jaime Wagner; Staff: Julie Hedlund, Liz Gasster, and Nathalie Peregrine General Comments: * Accept changes suggested by John and Chuck unless otherwise noted * Add outline numbering throughout (as reference below) * Note that since rationale will be included in the final document (not only for WG use) then the language should be made parallel and details added. * Consider whether to use “should” or “must” (suggestion in chat room by Wendy) 1. Scope of CWGs: a) Change “Limit purpose to” to “Purpose” i) Delete “and/or to ICANN staff” 2. Operations of CWGs: a) Formation of CWGs: ii) Consider adding “whenever possible” and bracket for further discussion. Could include a situation where you had a ccNSO/GNSO WG where you had some issues of common interest and others that were not, or where a separate set of rules might apply. There could be issues where there might be a separate set of rules. However, others asked why more than one set of rules might apply. Marked for discussion on the next call. Also, add language suggested by Mikey that indicates that the charter defines the rules and procedures for the CWG. b) Execution of CWGs: i) Why “as appropriate”? Suggested revision: “CWGs should follow the approved charter and bring concerns back to all chartering organizations for resolution according to their respective processes.” c) Outcomes of CWGs i) Suggested revision: “Policy recommendations should be considered for possible approval and approved through the appropriate Policy Development Process.” ii) Suggested revision: Delete “only” and “further” and change to “must communicate”. iii) Add new iii based on comments in the chat and Wendy’s follow up email on the list. Attachment:
Draft Principles for CWGs Edits 22 Nov.doc
|