<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
RE: [gnso-idn-wg] Addition to Section 4.2.1
- To: <rmohan@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, <gnso-idn-wg@xxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: RE: [gnso-idn-wg] Addition to Section 4.2.1
- From: "Yoav Keren" <yoav@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2007 01:20:46 +0200
Dear Ram,
First, this issue gained support in a call I was absent. I was merely
trying to elaborate on it. I don't see a difference between the Arabic
League experiment or what China did. What I believe is that when IDN
TLDs would be delegated, these past initiative need to be considered on
a case by case basis, while evaluating the situation in each case, and
consulting with the language community. It doesn't mean that
automatically those initiatives should be approved by ICANN, but rather
taken into consideration when delegating the IDN TLDs.
More over - I do not really understand this notion of an alternate root
- on one hand I heard ICANN people saying what China is doing is only a
local thing and that it does not collide with ICANN's root, yet also
heard others calling it an alternate root. Let's be frank here - what
China has done is launching Chinese IDN TLDs, that resolve widely within
China and of most importance marketed as such. They did not want to wait
for ICANN anymore (the people of the world have been waiting since
1999). Do we really think what has already been done in China can be
ignored? Do we really think that if ICANN decides differently the
Chinese will cease their IDN system?!?!
So it stand to reason that as we consider things case by case it is
likely that in some cases, like China, the two scenarios you brought up
may actually happen anyway.
I believe that the final editing of Tin Wee, is generally saying we must
take these occurrences into consideration on a case by case basis. Just
for reminder this was Tin Wee's last wording:
******************
Section 4.2.1
Support for both
(a) considering any local or regional pre-existing deployments of IDN
gTLDs, such as the experimental IDN system developed by the Arab League,
the Chinese language community and other communities in a smaller scale,
and
(b) not penalising them in the IDN gTLD application process, when
introducing new IDN gTLDs, so as to avoid potential confusion or
backlash.
*****************
We may want to add the word mentioned in Avri's statement "pioneering"
before "deployments", so the sentence would be "considering any local or
regional pre-existing pioneering deployments".
Yoav
________________________________
From: owner-gnso-idn-wg@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-idn-wg@xxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Ram Mohan
Sent: Monday, March 19, 2007 6:52 PM
To: Yoav Keren; gnso-idn-wg@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [gnso-idn-wg] Addition to Section 4.2.1
Dear Yoav,
Do I understand this correctly:
If a prior experiment/development exists, including in the use of an
alternate root, the use of a proxy system, or DNS changes that are
required of local ISPs in a specific geographic region, then:
- ICANN should provide backward compatibility for these
alternate root systems/"experimental" systems
- New IDN gTLD applicants should be barred from applying for
these, to avoid potential confusion/backlash
I appreciate your clarification.
Regards,
Ram
________________________________
From: owner-gnso-idn-wg@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-idn-wg@xxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Yoav Keren
Sent: Sunday, March 18, 2007 7:28 PM
To: gnso-idn-wg@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: [gnso-idn-wg] Addition to Section 4.2.1
Ram, Olof, all,
The issue in section 4.2.1 is an issue that was probably brought up
during a call that I have missed. First I would like to state my own
support for this view. Second, I think we should elaborate a little more
and add more examples and clarification to this point. I would like to
offer the following wording, which is the original one with two short
additions marked between 3 stars:
Support for considering local/regional pre-existing developments
regarding IDN gTLDs, for example, the experimental IDN system run by the
Arab League, ***China and other countries in a smaller scale*** when
considering introduction of new IDN gTLDs, ***to avoid potential
confusion/backlash.***
Thanks,
Yoav
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|