Re: [gnso-idn-wg] Issues list item

[Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx>]

Hi,


On 10 feb 2007, at 15.08, Will Rodger wrote:

> Tan Tin Wee wrote:
> > So there has to be a balance here. Whatever it is, failure to
> > take governments seriously or taking an adversarial approach
> > to governments or govt sponsored organisations in the matter of
> > language and scripts is a recipe for rapid failure, international
> > furore, and embarrassment at the naivette of governance
> > wannabees in the new world order of the Internet.
>
> I don't think anyone here wants to dismiss governmental  
> contributions, By the same token, I think it behooves the BC to  
> treat governments -- in this matter -- as parties that may or may  
> not have something to offer.  The best solution has to win,  
> regardless of origin.

I agree. As stakeholders within the discussion, I have no issue with  
government participation - i think they can be valuable members of  
the language community.  What worries me is any notion of giving  
governments jurisdiction over IDN labels or of accepting the notion  
that governments have any sort of veto over IDN TLD or SLD selection.

a.