RE: [gnso-idn-wg] GNSO IDN WG, Final Outcomes Report, draft for quick feedback - 4.2.10

["Olof Nordling" <olof.nordling@xxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Subbiah,
Actually, since 4.2.10 (now 4.2.9) is a sequence of views that relate to
countries and their (possible) rights etc, a statement on language
communities is a bit out of place here. I think we have largely covered the
gist of the statement you bring up by the agreements in 4.1.3 and 4.1.9d.
Best regards
Olof

PS. You mention 3 issues - I've only tracked two. Is there a third one?    

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-gnso-idn-wg@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-idn-wg@xxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of subbiah
Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2007 5:34 AM
To: olof nordling
Cc: gnso-idn-wg@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [gnso-idn-wg] GNSO IDN WG, Final Outcomes Report, draft for
quick feedback - 4.2.10


Olof

I have 3 issues, I will send each in a separate email.

I seem to recall, there was view that was proposed and supported by 
several on the email list that relates to current 4.2.10.
If not support, at the very least it should have been added as Alternate 
View I would have thought.

**************AS it stands***************

*4.2.10*

*Support* for a country's rights to define/reserve IDN strings for the 
country name.

*Alternative view*; to also accept a country's responsibility/right to 
approve any IDN gTLD strings featuring its particular script, if unique 
for that country.
*Alternative view*; to also acknowledge a country's right to influence 
the definitions/tables of its scripts/languages.

****************************************

I believe the proposal was to add the following new statement at some level:
*
**- to also consider a language community's input on any IDN gTLD 
strings featuring its particular script and its input in influencing the 
definitions/tables of its scripts, if its unanimous or near-unanimous.
*
Subbiah







olof nordling wrote:

>Dear all,
>At long last, here is the final report in draft, after reformatting it in
>sections by agreements and support, respectively (approach courtesy of our
>eminent chair Ram).
>Please read it carefully - not the least because the numbering has changed
>completely - and provide any comments to the full list.
>And now, the hard part, we are on a very tight timeline and this is already
>late, so please respond within 12 hours from now, meaning 
>
>deadline by 10 AM UTC 22 March. 
>
>I hope the GNSO Council will show some indulgence with the implied delay -
>we were supposed to provide the report no later than 21 March - but they
>certainly do need the report in time for reading prior to the ICANN Lisbon
>meeting. So I ask for your indulgence in keeping to this deadline.
>Very best regards
>Olof
> 
>  
>



-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.413 / Virus Database: 268.18.15/728 - Release Date: 3/20/2007