[gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] TR: Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information Charter Questions

[Glen de Saint Géry <Glen@xxxxxxxxx>]

FYI

De : Anne.Van-Roy@xxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:Anne.Van-Roy@xxxxxxxxxxxx] De la part de 
Linda.Corugedo-Steneberg@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Envoyé : lundi 10 février 2014 17:25
À : Glen de Saint Géry; gnso-secs@xxxxxxxxx
Cc : CNECT-D@xxxxxxxxxxxx; Lars-Erik.Forsberg@xxxxxxxxxxxx; 
Eddy.Hartog@xxxxxxxxxxxx; Ardiel.CABRERA@xxxxxxxxxxxx; 
Daniel.SPOIALA@xxxxxxxxxxxx; Marta.SANAGUSTIN@xxxxxxxxxxxx; 
Linda.Corugedo-Steneberg@xxxxxxxxxxxx; Camino.MANJON@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Objet : Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information Charter Questions

Dear Mr de Saint Géry,

Thank you for your email concerning Translation and Transliteration of Contact 
Information.

In the European Union we already have a certain level of expertise on the topic 
since the Top Level Domain "dot.eu" is managed the Registry provider EURid in 
all available languages of the EU.

In the EU there are a number of Member States which do use characters other 
than Latin scripts (i.e.: Cyrillic, Greek). Is for that reason that EURid 
supports the 24 EU official languages and the dot.eu WHOIS contains Registrant 
but also Registrar data in Greek and in Bulgarian and in any other language.

In line with our strive for multilingualism and equal access online, the 
specific EU Regulation pertaining to the "dot.eu" TLD foresees that EURid 
performs the registration of domain names in all languages of the European 
Union. Therefore we are of the view that any Registrant should be able to 
express himself in his own native language anywhere in the Internet. 
Registrants should be given the opportunity to submit data to the Registrar in 
his own language when registering a domain name.

>From our experience, there might be extra costs for some of the involved 
>parties (like the Registry, the Registrars and/or ICANN in the GNSO 
>environment), but that should be budgeted in the ultimate interest of the end 
>users.

As per your questions, please find our positive/negative feedback below:


·        Whether it is desirable to translate contact information to a single 
common language or transliterate contact information to a single common script 
// while Registrant information should be gathered in all existing languages 
and scripts, a translation to a single common language would be beneficial and 
ensure an homogeneous WHOIS resource.

·        What exactly the benefits to the community are of translating and/or 
transliterating contact information, especially in light of the costs that may 
be connected to translation and/or transliteration? // it facilitates 
registration for those Registrants who do not speak a common language or use a 
common script, while at the same time it makes easier the consultation of such 
data by parties (like Law Enforcement) who require a common language or who may 
face difficulties while dealing with non-Latin scripts. Registrants would have 
full rights when it comes to respect for multilingualism and Registrant data 
can be consulted/searched in a more homogeneous manner thanks to translation to 
a common language or script.

·        Should translation and/or transliteration of contact information be 
mandatory for all gTLDs? Yes

·        Should translation and/or transliteration of contact information be 
mandatory for all registrants or only those based in certain countries and/or 
using specific non-ASCII scripts? For all

·        What impact will translation/transliteration of contact information 
have on the WHOIS validation as set out under the 2013 Registrar Accreditation 
Agreement? Validation will be more cumbersome provided there is no translation 
or transliteration

·        When should any new policy relating to translation and transliteration 
of contact information come into effect? As soon as possible, provided that it 
is reasonable.

·        Do you have suggestions concerning the basic principles to guide the 
cost burden discussion, such as the free of charge provision of the 
information, demand-oriented cost etc.?  In particular, the PDP WG is tasked 
with determining who should decide who should bear the burden translating 
contact information to a single common language or transliterating contact 
information to a single common script. // Registries should bear the cost of 
translation and transliteration of Registrar data, and Registrars should bear 
the cost of translation and transliteration of registrant data. As indicated 
above, this is the cost of making business. The additional cost should be 
budgeted in the interest of end users. The transliteration and translation 
should not have, in any case, an effect on the final price that Registrants 
bear.

We hope you deem this feedback useful.

Best regards


Linda CORUGEDO STENEBERG
DIRECTOR

[cid:image001.gif@01CF267B.1C1F4D00]
European Commission
Communications networks, Content and Technologies Directorate-General, DG 
CONNECT
Cooperation, Directorate D

BU 25 06/24
B-1049 Brussels/Belgium
+32 22996383
Mobile+32-498996383
linda.corugedo-steneberg@xxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:linda.corugedo-steneberg@xxxxxxxxxxxx>




From: Glen de Saint Géry [mailto:Glen@xxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Tuesday, February 04, 2014 11:40 PM
To: CNECT D
Cc: gnso-secs@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-secs@xxxxxxxxx>; Lars Hoffmann
Subject: Input Request:Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information 
Charter Questions

Dear GAC representative, dear Linda

As you may be aware, the GNSO Council recently initiated a Policy Development 
Process<http://gnso.icann.org/en/basics/pdp-process.htm> (PDP) on the 
Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information; the relevant Issue 
Report can be found 
here<http://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/gtlds/transliteration-contact-final-21mar13-en.pdf>.
 A more detailed background<https://community.icann.org/x/eTOfAg> is available 
online on the Working Group's 
Wiki<https://community.icann.org/display/tatcipdp/Translation+and+Transliteration+of+Contact+Information+PDP+Home>
 where you can also consult the 
Charter<https://community.icann.org/display/ITPIPDWG/3.+WG+Charter>. As part of 
its efforts to obtain broad input from the ICANN Community at an early stage 
and we have written to Ms Heather Dryden, Chair of the GAC, already to solicit 
feedback from the GAC where possible.

However, as the matter of translating and/or transliteration of Contact 
information will be of special significance for countries that do not use Latin 
Scripts, we thought it useful to contact individual GAC representatives. Please 
note that we do not seek an official position on this matter but rather would 
welcome any thoughts and/or experiences you might have and what the best 
practice might be or ought to be in your country on this matter. An informal 
response to any of the questions below or any other thoughts you might have on 
the issue of translation and transliteration of Contact Information would be 
very much appreciated.  Please send these to the GNSO Secretariat 
(gnso.secretariat@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso.secretariat@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>) who 
will forward these to the Working Group; ideally by Tuesday 11 March 2014.

Finally, our Working Group is planning to gather for a face-to-face meeting 
during the forthcoming ICANN Meeting in Singapore. We would be delighted if you 
could join our discussions should you be in Singapore at the time. We will 
renew this invitation closer to the time when we have finalized our meeting 
time and agenda.

Many thanks and best wishes,

Chris Dillon (Co-Chair)
Rudi Vansnick (Co-Chair)

Input Request
Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information Charter Questions
Whether it is desirable to translate contact information to a single common 
language or transliterate contact information to a single common script.
What exactly the benefits to the community are of translating and/or 
transliterating contact information, especially in light of the costs that may 
be connected to translation and/or transliteration?
Should translation and/or transliteration of contact information be mandatory 
for all gTLDs?
Should translation and/or transliteration of contact information be mandatory 
for all registrants or only those based in certain countries and/or using 
specific non-ASCII scripts?
What impact will translation/transliteration of contact information have on the 
WHOIS validation as set out under the 2013 Registrar Accreditation Agreement?
When should any new policy relating to translation and transliteration of 
contact information come into effect?
Do you have suggestions concerning the basic principles to guide the cost 
burden discussion, such as the free of charge provision of the information, 
demand-oriented cost etc.?  In particular, the PDP WG is tasked with 
determining who should decide who should bear the burden translating contact 
information to a single common language or transliterating contact information 
to a single common script. This question relates to the concern expressed by 
the Internationalized Registration Data Working Group (IRD-WG) in its report 
that there are costs associated with providing translation and transliteration 
of contact information. For example, if a policy development process (PDP) 
determined that the registrar must translate or transliterate contact 
information, this policy would place a cost burden on the registrar.
 Glen de Saint Géry
GNSO Secretariat
gnso.secretariat@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso.secretariat@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
http://gnso.icann.org