[gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] Linda Corugedo Steneberg's letter

["Dillon, Chris" <c.dillon@xxxxxxxxx>]

Dear colleagues,

Please find some issues arising from Linda Corugedo Steneberg's letter for 
discussion in tomorrow's call.

Background
Linda Corugedo Steneberg is Director of the European Commission's 
Communications networks, Content and Technologies Directorate-General, DG 
CONNECT Cooperation, Directorate D. The EU manages .eu in all languages of the 
EU, including Greek and Bulgarian, including the registration of domain names.

"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."
It would be worth knowing exactly what those costs are for (transliteration or 
translation, which fields, verification etc.) and how substantial they are. 
There are also suggestions about who pays, i.e.
"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."
The last sentence may not necessarily be the case if the registrars and 
registries are for some reason not able to subsidise the increased costs 
foreign language work will cause.

A homogeneous WHOIS (i.e. IRD) resource is quoted as a benefit of 
transliterating/translating. Using a common language facilitates registration 
when registrants do not share one. Consultation of data by law enforcement et 
al. requires a common language. These benefits should be added to our wiki as 
answers to some of the questions.

"Registrants would have full rights when it comes to respect for 
multilingualism" would mean that registrars would need to be able to process 
applications in a wide range of languages, in this case it's the EU languages. 
It could be argued that this is a special case and that many registries would 
not need to process applications in such a wide range of languages. It may be 
useful to think through some scenarios, for example, involving applications for 
domain names in scripts applied for in countries where there is little 
experience with the script in question.

"Validation will be more cumbersome provided there is no translation or 
transliteration" What is being validated? That the non-ASCII label is what it 
says it is, or that the transliteration/translation is correct?

I welcome your responses to these issues and others you may find in the letter, 
either before or during tomorrow's call.

Regards,

Chris.
--
Research Associate in Linguistic Computing, Centre for Digital Humanities, UCL, 
Gower St, London WC1E 6BT Tel +44 20 7679 1599 (int 31599) 
ucl.ac.uk/dis/people/chrisdillon

De : Anne.Van-Roy@xxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:Anne.Van-Roy@xxxxxxxxxxxx> 
[mailto:Anne.Van-Roy@xxxxxxxxxxxx] De la part de 
Linda.Corugedo-Steneberg@xxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:Linda.Corugedo-Steneberg@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Envoyé : lundi 10 février 2014 17:25
À : Glen de Saint Géry; gnso-secs@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-secs@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc : CNECT-D@xxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:CNECT-D@xxxxxxxxxxxx>; 
Lars-Erik.Forsberg@xxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:Lars-Erik.Forsberg@xxxxxxxxxxxx>; 
Eddy.Hartog@xxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:Eddy.Hartog@xxxxxxxxxxxx>; 
Ardiel.CABRERA@xxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:Ardiel.CABRERA@xxxxxxxxxxxx>; 
Daniel.SPOIALA@xxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:Daniel.SPOIALA@xxxxxxxxxxxx>; 
Marta.SANAGUSTIN@xxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:Marta.SANAGUSTIN@xxxxxxxxxxxx>; 
Linda.Corugedo-Steneberg@xxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:Linda.Corugedo-Steneberg@xxxxxxxxxxxx>;
 Camino.MANJON@xxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto: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@01CF27D9.F6E2D100]
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>