ICANN ICANN Email List Archives

[gnso-dt-wg]


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

RE: [gnso-dt-wg] Domain Tasting Outcomes Report version 1.6 part 1

  • To: "'Rosette, Kristina'" <krosette@xxxxxxx>, "'Olof Nordling'" <olof.nordling@xxxxxxxxx>, <gnso-dt-wg@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: RE: [gnso-dt-wg] Domain Tasting Outcomes Report version 1.6 part 1
  • From: "Mike Rodenbaugh" <mxrodenbaugh@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2007 17:16:08 -0700

Thanks Kristina for your review and comments.  I'm not going to try to
change the Annexes at this point due to all the internal linking already in
the doc.  Your other comments are well taken.

Mike

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-gnso-dt-wg@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-dt-wg@xxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Rosette, Kristina
Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2007 1:57 PM
To: Olof Nordling; gnso-dt-wg@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [gnso-dt-wg] Domain Tasting Outcomes Report version 1.6 part 1

All,

The attached pdf file contains my suggested revisions, all of which are
quite minor.   (Seemed easier than submitting the entire document).

Some comments:

1.  The annexes should probably be-ordered to correspond to text.  I haven't
made changes in the text or in the Annex headings because I didn't want to
wreck any cross-referencing.  If we're going to do so, three Annexes need to
change:

IPC - now Annex 5, but should be Annex 3 ccTLDs - now Annex 3, but should be
Annex 4 UDRP - now Annex 4, but should be Annex 5

2.  My comment w/r/t 1.3 is to keep the heading with the text, which may not
require revision depending on other changes.

3.  I was not clear as to what "potentially modified" referred to in 1.4 so
made my best guess, which may not be correct.

4.  Sally Foreman, the source of the quote in the IPC RFI summary, asked
that she be permitted to amend her comment slightly for clarity.  That
seemed to be a reasonable request in exchange for agreeing to be identified
so I've made the slight amendments.  

5.  While I believe the current version of section 4.4 is greatly improved
from its original form, I still have transparency- and perception-related
concerns.  Given our timing, I did not see the point in suggesting further
revisions.

Kristina




 

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-gnso-dt-wg@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-dt-wg@xxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Olof Nordling
Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2007 6:08 PM
To: gnso-dt-wg@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: [gnso-dt-wg] Domain Tasting Outcomes Report version 1.6 part 1

Dear all,
Attached please find part 1 of the next-to-final version of our report,
revised in line with the conference call a few hours ago (yes, it took a bit
longer to carry out than I had hoped...). Do note that since the text is
chopped in two pieces (due to bulkiness), the internal links do not function
properly. In the complete version, they do, trust me.
Part 2 will follow very shortly.
Please note that Mike needs your comments on this no later than 2 PM
(PDT) Thursday 4 October!
Best regards
Olof




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