Re: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] Themes for discussion

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

Dear colleagues,

As promised during our last call, I am recirculating the latest version of the 
recommendations and the points identified so far for discussion, in preparation 
for Thursday's meeting. Please feel free to circulate any other themes you spot 
as you read the recommendations to this mailing list.

Regards,

Chris.

From: <Dillon>, Chris Dillon <c.dillon@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:c.dillon@xxxxxxxxx>>
Date: Wednesday, 30 July 2014 10:31
To: 
"gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg@xxxxxxxxx>" 
<gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg@xxxxxxxxx>>
Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] Themes for discussion

Dear colleagues,

I would like to assemble here some themes for discussion during tomorrow's 
call, apart from the purposes/accuracy one that has already come up (see my 
earlier email below).

Here are some other themes I am aware of:

·         Should we recommend that there should be an option for registrants 
voluntarily to input transformed contact information?

·         Should we recommend that something be done with legacy transformed 
contact information (i.e. contact information input using a different policy 
from what we are recommending)?

·         It seems likely that our recommendations for those cases when 
transformation occurs will not be binding. That would mean, for example, that 
C5 on when the policy comes into effect would need to be redrafted.

·         What should happen to transformed contact information created by 
other stakeholders? O2 may need redrafting.

Please send any additional themes for discussion to this mailing list. I've 
attached the recommendations for your convenience.

Regards,

Chris.

From: 
owner-gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:owner-gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg@xxxxxxxxx>
 [mailto:owner-gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Dillon, Chris
Sent: 25 July 2014 11:00
To: gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] Purpose and accuracy

Dear colleagues,

Ideally we need to add something about the purposes of contact information that 
require accuracy and those that don't.

The Final report from the EWG on gTLD Directory Services has a good list of 
purposes from p.19-34.

The Study to evaluate solutions for the submission and display of 
internationalized contact data has a useful section on Information accuracy for 
effective use on p.9 with three levels of accuracy suggested:
1. Requiring accurate transformation (e.g. valid in a court of law, matching 
information in a passport, matching information in legal incorporation etc.)
2. Requiring consistent transformation (allowing use of such information to 
match other information provided in another context, e.g. to match address 
information to a registrant on a Google map, etc.)
3. Requiring ad hoc transformation (allowing informal or casual version of the 
information in another language to provide more general accessibility)

The last sentence of the study is of particular interest to us from the 
accuracy point of view and also from its summary of the state of the 
transformation tools etc.:
"The study has found that provisioning and querying protocols are lacking 
either support or deployment for internationalized registration data, and that 
the tools tested are not providing a high level of transformation accuracy and 
consistency of internationalized registration data."

Do we need a better analysis of purposes and accuracy? Does one exist?

Incidentally, see 
https://community.icann.org/display/tatcipdp/7+Studies+and+Background+Documents
for links to the reports mentioned above.

Regards,

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