Re: [gnso-iocrc-dt] The list of "temporarily reserved strings"
Jim, on reading your message and getting quite confused, I looked once more at my original note and realized that I had interchanged the titles. It should have read:
IOC: The GAC list includes Danish/Norwegian and Japanese that are not in the AG.
Red Cross: The lists are almost identical, except to my untrained eye (as well as Google Translate), the Arabic version in the two documents seem quite different.
Sorry for the error. Alan At 12/11/2012 05:00 PM, Jim Bikoff wrote:
Dear Alan, Thank you for following up on this issue.The GAC letter (attached) includes Danish/Norwegian and Japanese translations for the Olympic words as well. As far as we can see, and we have double checked our translation records, the Arabic is correct, and identical in the GAC letter and Applicant Guidebook.In order to avoid reopening the lengthy and time consuming discussions that we had about languages during deliberations regarding top level protection, we would like to reemphasize that our position in regard to these Recommendations, is that the IOC seeks to temporarily reserve those strings listed in Applicant Guidebook 220.127.116.11.3 (the 6 UN languages plus Greek, German, and Korean), pending the outcome of a PDP.Thank you, Jim James L. Bikoff Silverberg, Goldman & Bikoff, LLP 1101 30th Street, NW Suite 120 Washington, DC 20007 Tel: 202-944-3303 Fax: 202-944-3306 jbikoff@xxxxxxxxx -----Original Message-----From: owner-gnso-iocrc-dt@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-iocrc-dt@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Alan GreenbergSent: Wednesday, November 07, 2012 11:30 PM To: gnso-iocrc-dt@xxxxxxxxx Subject: [gnso-iocrc-dt] The list of "temporarily reserved strings"During the meetingtoday, the issue came up whether we should be using the list published in the AG, or in the September 2011 GAC letter to the GNSO.I did a quick review of them.Red Cross: The GAC list includes Danish/Norwegian and Japanese that are not in the AG.IOC: The lists are almost identical, except to my untrained eye (as well as Google Translate), the Arabic version in the two documents seem quite different.Alan