[gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] MP3 Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information PDP WG meeting 2 June 2015

[Nathalie Peregrine <nathalie.peregrine@xxxxxxxxx>]

Dear All,

Please find the MP3 recording for the Translation and Transliteration of 
Contact Information PDP Working Group call held on Tuesday 2 June 2015  at 
13:00 UTC at:  
http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-transliteration-contact-02jun15-en.mp3<http://mailer.samanage.com/wf/click?upn=NrFWbrBstcrPWP369qgbqlXiSKeL20xnUXzI03ZqpstVYEtAkUhnqHJbcMva2zeHXPBYS28IAQ-2BFDnoOG2tPq034BYs7yyRw5z9U5OfTu8M-3D_QuA5zZR9ZZ7J1F2FeF-2FOsgm1hgIDcBrAX2P7Ezxmql7ckJc4ios1-2BxObAoz2rzLSI3c4QB1NGo7bw7XrBjpRCbz74w4vzk48UxZMFoBBQBQaQ0ePdiOjdJ30sQNHkokOf-2F2p-2FBvMgKvMhzp-2B4u8fP-2BRrSytHe2KCf2HpQmtSbpezMgNTUG57PiORAPesOotpHA-2BC4pSmXJRsVmpbNaLqzqxxpN8od-2BN5fPdm0-2FYAH4zYeaUMwz8UBnn4983WltnVPpBLM1qgZuuVsmstTm4KrHikAUxK4HZH-2FSjYYv0qBVNcUCU7IcRkVV6oNVx62Z5hDNl5VaBJmCGYJgi9s3zX6TKHB1-2F3OrMqAEE-2Fy6Wr2atjGGu5oxrLe9k8VgMJj0DZcrdY95ZoKdI0UQ7RitYlIWUAocfHlrSwPJHNfmJ6ULtU8q2we5kxvEXCqM9ovecgVl1FWP-2BM2aNz1tjwCOhW4SA5KVMcQzPJYmhkozXb7KhvQKdy4Za9u7A8X7QP7Yq2>
On page:
<http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar#may>http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar#j<http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar#jun>un<http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar#jun>
The recordings and transcriptions of the calls are posted on the GNSO
Master Calendar page:http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar

Attendees:
Chris Dillon – NCSG
Sara Bockey – RrSG
Ubolthip Sethakaset – Individual
Amr Elsadr – NCUC
Peter Green (Zhang Zuan) – NCUC
 Justine Chew – Individual
Jim Galvin - RySG

Apologies:
Petter Rindforth – IPC
Wen Zhai -


ICANN Staff
Julie Hedlund
Lars Hoffmann
Glen de St Gery
Nathalie Peregrine

** Please let me know if your name has been left off the list **

 Wiki page: http://tinyurl.com/mpwxstx

Thank you.
Kind regards,

Nathalie
Adobe Chat Transcript for Tuesday 2 June 2015:

 Nathalie  Peregrine:Welcome to the Translation and Transliteration PDP Working 
Group on Thursday, 2nd June 2015

  Jim Galvin:hi ... dialing in now
  Jim Galvin:and now on the line
  Jim Galvin:no problem waiting a bit longer given the special time
  Rudi Vansnick:indeed, sometimes Adobe is not willing to allow you to conect
  Chris Dillon:But we love it really
  Justine Chew:Hello, are we short on participants?
  Chris Dillon:A little, but I'm not for giving up
  Peter Green (CONAC):Hi Sorry for being late
  Lars Hoffmann:i agree with Jim that the *could* should go.
  Lars Hoffmann:also it will become 'preliminary' should be taken off.
  Rudi Vansnick:i would also prefer to remove "could" but I'm not a native 
english speaker
  Rudi Vansnick:unlikely to exist soon : do not forget the timing of this 
report being approved is approx a few months from now ...
  Rudi Vansnick:at their own expense ...
  Sara Bockey:Is  statement "consistency would be an issue" truly necessary.  
If we are recommending it is not desirable and at the requesters expense, and 
not public, is this last sentence necessary?
  Amr Elsadr:Apologies for being late. Had another meeting that ran longer than 
expected.
  Justine Chew 2:Any parties requiring SUCH transformation are free to do it ad 
hoc outside the Whois replacement system at their own expense while ensuring 
their exercise meets their exact transformation requirements.
  Amr Elsadr:If our recommendations are meant to be implemented immediately, 
there's no need to really describe it as the "whois replacement".
  Lars Hoffmann:@jim +1
  Amr Elsadr:Agree with Jim.
  Sara Bockey:@Jim +1
  Jim Galvin:Could be numbers for example.
  Amr Elsadr:"supported by" is what I'm seeing in the AC room.
  Amr Elsadr:Would we like to pluralize "language or script" in rec #3?
  Rudi Vansnick:at the end it is the registrar who offers a platform (form) for 
registration based on their knowledge of languages
  Amr Elsadr:@Rudi: +1
  Sara Bockey:Yes, it seems to go against universal acceptance a bit
  Amr Elsadr:@Chris: That sounds good to me. :)
  Amr Elsadr:@Chris: +1
  Jim Galvin:I understand the desire to "protect" registrars from the 
requirement that they might have to support all languages and scripts.
  Jim Galvin:I think that might be part of what is hidden in this 
recommendation.  I'm wondering if we could say it differently, although I don't 
have a suggestion offhand which is why I was inclined to drop it.
  Amr Elsadr:@Jim: Yes..., a requirement to support all languages/scripts would 
be especially burdensome on local up and coming registrars trying to serve 
their local communities.
  Amr Elsadr:..., which would probably also be reflected on the registrants 
paying for the services they are (or aren't) receiving.
  Amr Elsadr:Not a suspicion. It's a bottom line. Registrars are businesses, 
not charities. :)
  Jim Galvin:+1 chris
  Jim Galvin:do we mean "consistent" or "self-consistent"?
  Justine Chew 2:what about "identified"?
  Amr Elsadr:For the record, I'm fine with "tagged".
  Jim Galvin:I'm also fine with tagged.
  Amr Elsadr:@Jim: Not sure what you mean by self-consistent?
  Amr Elsadr:Consistency is an RAA requirement. Response consistency was also 
an issue addressed by the "thick" whois PDP in that context.
  Amr Elsadr:Consistency in the RAA is against standards made clear in the 2013 
RAA.
  Justine Chew 2:@Jim: I think the term "self-consistent" has a less clear 
meaning than "consistent"
  Jim Galvin:If that's our definition of consistency we should say that.  I'm 
thinking a footnote that "defines" consistency is needed.
  Amr Elsadr:@Jim: +1. Sounds good.
  Rudi Vansnick:@Jim : +1
  Justine Chew 2:Fine with me.
  Rudi Vansnick:so 1 to 4 : closed discssion ?
  Rudi Vansnick:ok
  Jim Galvin:@Amr +1
  Rudi Vansnick:just something that comes to my mind : rec#1 : how could one 
see the registrar has transformed the contact data at their own expense ?
  Amr Elsadr:@Rudi: That's an interesting question. The registrant could submit 
a second set of transformed data that the registrar can display.
  Sara Bockey:Does rec #5 run against rec #3? Registrant is not necessarily 
providing local script, but script supported by the registrar
  Jim Galvin:Going back to Amr's original point, what needs to happen is we 
need to know what is the "original authoritative data".
  Jim Galvin:Then all other data is "transformed", it needs to be flagged as 
such, and the source of the transformation needs to be noted.
  Amr Elsadr:@Jim: +1. Pointing out the authoritative set would eliminate the 
concern behind who transformed the second set of data.
  Jim Galvin:So the display is "two blocks" of the same data, flagged 
appropriately.
  Jim Galvin:@Amr - there's not necessarily a concern about who transformed the 
data but I think it would be useful to know the source.
  Rudi Vansnick:@Jim : +1
  Amr Elsadr:@Jim: Yes. Although the source of the transformation is helpful, 
do we want to recommend a contractual requirement to display this? This is 
porbably a question the WG needs to answer.
  Sara Bockey:@Amr - agree
  Jim Galvin:@Amr - additional discussion would be good.  I think it would be 
helpful but would like to hear other points of view
  Amr Elsadr:I agree that it "might" be helpful. It does not necessarily 
guarantee any added accuracy, though. This depends on the arbitrary ability of 
whoever is performing the transformation.
  Sara Bockey:thank you everyone!
  Jim Galvin:bye thanks all
  Rudi Vansnick:thanks a lot Chris
  Amr Elsadr:Thanks all. Bye.
  Peter Green (CONAC):bye all
  Chris Dillon:Many thanks and goodbye till Thursday.