[gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] Re: Responses to the complete overview table

[Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@xxxxxxxxx>]

Dear Rudi,

Thank you for forwarding the responses and actions provided by Chris.  I
have compiled these into the attached updated table and also posted it to
the wiki on the community input page at:
https://community.icann.org/display/tatcipdp/13+Community+Input.

I will separately send an action request to WG members to provide responses
via email on the list in the format suggested by Chris. Staff then can input
those responses into the table and send an updated version in advance of
next week's meeting.

Best regards,
Julie

From:  Rudi Vansnick <rudi.vansnick@xxxxxxx>
Date:  Thursday, May 15, 2014 9:21 AM
To:  "gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg@xxxxxxxxx" <gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc:  Lars Hoffmann <lars.hoffmann@xxxxxxxxx>, Julie Hedlund
<julie.hedlund@xxxxxxxxx>, "Dillon, Chris" <c.dillon@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject:  Responses to the complete overview table

Dear all, 

During the call of May 5 we have been working on the overview table put
together by staff (Lars & Julie : many thanks) and ended up at nbr 9. Chris
Dillon has put the responses and recommended actions together, which you can
find below.
 
Record 1
WG Response: It may be necessary to confirm that the second use of ³English²
refers to a transliteration to the Latin alphabet.
Recommended Action: Confirm we have understood correctly
Answer: Y
 
Record 2
WG Response: A future IRDS will contain contact information in non-ASCII
scripts.
Recommended Action: How do they see this being implemented in each member
state?
Answer: N/A
 
Record 3
WG Response: The option using scripts representable in the current WHOIS is
undesirable, as it could only cope with a strange subset of languages. The
option linking WHOIS to non-ASCII systems is undesirable as it would be
implemented differently locally and could end up becoming a poor long-term
solution.
Recommended Action: A new IRDS as soon as possible.
Answer: Y
 
Record 4
WG Response: none
Recommended Action: none
Answer: Y
 
Record 5
WG Response: A future IRDS will contain contact information in non-ASCII
scripts.
Recommended Action: How do they see this being implemented in each member
state?
Answer: N/A
 
Record 6
WG Response: It is important to note that policy cannot contradict the 2013
RAA.
Recommended Action:
Answer: N
 
Record 7
WG Response:
Recommended Action:
(No answer row, as they are not and SO or AC.)
 
Record 8
WG Response: This WG has not stated that validation or transformation is
tightly related to the role of government. The economy of a single registry
system is noted.
Recommended Action:
Answer: Y
 
Record 9
WG Response: Most members of this WG believe that validation should be done
on data in the original language and script.
Recommended Action:
Answer: Y

I would propose we work on the table during the coming days through email,
with the same structure as Chris had put above. If possible we should at
least try to have input up to Issue 5 - nbr 26. We will collect all the
reactions and will have a discussion on them during the next call (next
week). 

Hope to see you all next call.

Rudi Vansnick

Attachment: Public comment review tool T&T - 09 May2014.doc
Description: MS-Word document

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature