ICANN ICANN Email List Archives

[gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg]


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Re: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] WHOIS-Related Current and Completed Work

  • To: Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: Re: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] WHOIS-Related Current and Completed Work
  • From: Rudi Vansnick <rudi.vansnick@xxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2014 21:57:59 +0100

Dear Julie,

Thank you very much for the quick response and the provided information.

Kind regards,

Rudi Vansnick
NPOC chair Policy Committee
NPOC treasurer
rudi.vansnick@xxxxxxxx
Tel : +32 (0)9 329 39 16
Mobile : +32 (0)475 28 16 32
www.npoc.org

Op 20-feb.-2014, om 21:50 heeft Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@xxxxxxxxx> het 
volgende geschreven:

> Dear PDP WG members,
> 
> In response to the question from Amr today about whether there is 
> WHOIS-related PDP (or other) work that may be addressing the same issues as 
> the PDP WG please see below the list of current and recently completed work.  
> Staff have presented some of this information at various times in the 
> formation of this PDP WG, and via presentations from Margie Milam and Steve 
> Sheng at a previous meeting, but it appears that it would be helpful to put 
> it all in one place to avoid any confusion.  One thing to note is that 
> following the Board resolutions on WHOIS in November 2012 a large number of 
> projects (both PDP and non-PDP) were launched and the Board envisioned that 
> these would proceed concurrently, rather than consecutively.  See the helpful 
> blog from Margie Milam on all of the WHOIS-related developments at: 
> http://blog.icann.org/2013/03/whois-whats-to-come/.  
> 
> As I noted on today's call, this PDP WG is the only PDP that addresses the 
> specific issues relating to the translation and transliteration of contact 
> information.  The work of this PDP WG will be taken into consideration in 
> conjunction with the Board-initiated PDP on gTLD directory services, which is 
> tied to the work of the Expert Working Group on gTLD Directory Services (see 
> below).  The final report of the EWG will form the Final Issue Report for 
> that Board-initiated PDP.  
> 
> The Expert Working Group that is defining requirements for internationalized 
> registration data and a corresponding data model for gTLD registries (#3 
> below) is the group that Jim Galvin is leading.  The work of that group is 
> tied closely to that of this PDP WG.  Both relate to item #13 in the chart in 
> Margie's blog, which is taken from the Board's work plan.  That plan states, 
> "ICANN will form a community working group to determine appropriate 
> internationalized domain name registration data requirements based on 
> requirements set forth in GNSO internationalized registration data working 
> Group final Report."  The work this PDP WG will be considered by this EWG so 
> the two groups will coordinate closely.
> 
> I have added this information to the studies and background page on the wiki 
> at: 
> https://community.icann.org/display/tatcipdp/7.+Studies+and+Background+Documents.
>   For a list of active GNSO PDP and non-PDP projects see: 
> http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/active. 
> 
> As you can see, these efforts are very much intertwined.  Policies resulting 
> from this PDP WG (if any) will be key elements in future policies relating to 
> the development of a new gTLD directory service, in defining requirements for 
> internationalized registration data, and in the development of the data model 
> for gTLD registries.
> 
> Please let me know if you have further questions.
> 
> Best regards,
> Julie
> 
> Julie Hedlund, Policy Director
> 
> Recently Completed Work: 
> 
> PDP on Thick WHOIS: 
> http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/active/thick-whois 
> 
> The GNSO Council requested an Issue Report on 'thick' Whois at its meeting on 
> 22 September 2011 noting that the Issue Report should 'not only consider a 
> possible requirement of 'thick' WHOIS for all incumbent gTLDs in the context 
> of IRTP, but should also consider any other positive and/or negative effects 
> that are likely to occur outside of IRTP that would need to be taken into 
> account when deciding whether a requirement of 'thick' WHOIS for all 
> incumbent gTLDs would be desirable or not'.
> 
> The Final Report was adopted by the ICANN Board on 07 February 2014. See the 
> resolution at: 
> http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/documents/resolutions-07feb14-en.htm#2.c.
>  
> 
> Current Work:
> 
> 1. Study Group to Evaluate Available Solutions for the Submission and Display 
> of Internationalized Contact Data.
> See: 
> https://community.icann.org/display/whoisird/Study+to+Evaluate+Available+Solutions+for+the+Submission+and+Display+of+Internationalized+Contact+Data
> 
> The purpose of the study is to: 
> Document the submission and display practices of internationalized 
> registration data at a representative set of gTLD and ccTLD registries and 
> registrars.  
> Investigate and document how other e-merchants or web sites manage 
> internationalized contact data.
> Consider and assess the cost and functionality of commercial, open source, or 
> other known but as yet not widely implemented solutions for 1) 
> transliterating internationalized contact information to US-ASCII, 2) 
> translating internationalized contact information to English,  3) 
> transcribing internationalized contact information to US-ASCII, or 4) a 
> mixture of translation, transliteration and transcription.   
> Consider and assess the accuracy implications for transliteration and 
> translation of the internationalized contact data
> Based on practices documented in 1  and understanding the issues raised in 3 
> and 4  and best practices by other e-merchants in 2, summarize some common 
> best practices registry/registrar could do to minimize these variations, if 
> translation and/or transliteration is deemed necessary. 
>     The study team is currently on the first task, and has prepared a 
> registry and registrar survey to complete. Since this group is closely 
> working in this area, we appreciate very much if you have any feedback on 
> these survey questions. Such feedback will help us to make sure we ask the 
> right questions.  
> 
> 2.  Expert Working Group on gTLD Directory Services, See: 
> http://www.icann.org/en/groups/other/gtld-directory-services
> 
> 13 December 2012 – Fadi Chehadé, ICANN's President and CEO, announces the 
> creation of an Expert Working Group on gTLD Directory Services. This first 
> step in fulfilling the ICANN Board's directive to help redefine the purpose 
> and provision of gTLD registration data will provide a foundation to help the 
> ICANN community (through the Generic Names Supporting Organization, GNSO) 
> create a new global policy for gTLD directory services. Interested 
> individuals are invited to indicate their interest in serving as volunteer 
> working group members.
> Initial Report: 
> http://www.icann.org/en/groups/other/gtld-directory-services/initial-report-24jun13-en.pdf
> Status Update Report: 
> http://www.icann.org/en/groups/other/gtld-directory-services/status-update-11nov13-en.pdf
>  
> See the Preliminary Issue Report of the Board-initiated PDP at: 
> http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/gtld-registration-data-15mar13-en.htm.
>  
> 
> 3.  Expert Working Group to Define Requirements for Internationalized 
> Registration Data and Corresponding Data Model for gTLD Registries
> See: http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-08jul13-en.htm. 
> 
> As part of the process to implement WHOIS review team recommendations related 
> to Internationalized Domain Name registration data requirements, ICANN seeks 
> volunteers who are community representatives with expertise in linguistics, 
> IDNA, policy and registry/registrar operations to participate in a working 
> group to determine appropriate Internationalized Domain Name registration 
> data requirements and data model for Registration Data Directory Services 
> (aka WHOIS services).  The result of the WG product will go through a public 
> comment process to ensure broad input is received. It will form the basis for 
> further policy development and/or contractual framework for generic Top-level 
> domains, as well as ideally becoming  a best practice for country code 
> top-level domains.
> 
> 
> 

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail



<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy