ICANN ICANN Email List Archives

[gnso-rn-wg]


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

RE: [gnso-rn-wg] nic, whois, www version 10 with attachement

  • To: <marilynscade@xxxxxxxxxxx>, <owner-gnso-rn-wg@xxxxxxxxx>, "Timothy Denton" <tim@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Reserved Names Working Group ICANN" <gnso-rn-wg@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: RE: [gnso-rn-wg] nic, whois, www version 10 with attachement
  • From: "Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Sun, 11 Mar 2007 10:24:16 -0400

I think they could be addressed in the ICANN/IANA names report.

Chuck Gomes
 
"This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity to
which it is addressed, and may contain information that is privileged,
confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. Any
unauthorized use, distribution, or disclosure is strictly prohibited. If
you have received this message in error, please notify sender
immediately and destroy/delete the original transmission." 
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: marilynscade@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:marilynscade@xxxxxxxxxxx] 
> Sent: Saturday, March 10, 2007 12:47 PM
> To: Gomes, Chuck; owner-gnso-rn-wg@xxxxxxxxx; Timothy Denton; 
> Reserved Names Working Group ICANN
> Subject: Re: [gnso-rn-wg] nic, whois, www version 10 with attachement
> 
> Does this mean that the string (s) sre not addressed 
> elsewhere? Or just not here? And a footnote that explainw why 
> is useful. 
> Regards,
> Marilyn Cade
>   
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: "Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2007 19:30:01 
> To:"Timothy Denton" <tim@xxxxxxxxxxxx>,       "Reserved Names 
> Working Group ICANN" <gnso-rn-wg@xxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: RE: [gnso-rn-wg] nic, whois, www version 10 with attachement
> 
> Thanks Tim.  It seems to me that it might be a good idea to 
> add a sentence to what you added regarding html, http and 
> https, something like the following: "Because reservation of 
> names that this report addresses (NIC, Whois, www) are for 
> registry operational uses and because there does not seem to 
> be any identified registry operational need for html, http 
> and https, it is not recommended that html, http and https be 
> added to this category."
> 
> Chuck Gomes
>  
> "This message is intended for the use of the individual or 
> entity to which it is addressed, and may contain information 
> that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure 
> under applicable law. Any unauthorized use, distribution, or 
> disclosure is strictly prohibited. If you have received this 
> message in error, please notify sender immediately and 
> destroy/delete the original transmission." 
>  
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-gnso-rn-wg@xxxxxxxxx
> > [mailto:owner-gnso-rn-wg@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Timothy Denton
> > Sent: Friday, March 09, 2007 7:00 PM
> > To: Reserved Names Working Group ICANN
> > Subject: Re: [gnso-rn-wg] nic, whois, www version 10 with 
> attachement
> > 
> > 
> > This time with attachment.
> > Timothy Denton wrote:
> > > Slight changes of text.
> > > No further work on http https and html is recommended.
> > > The IDN formulation recommended by Cary Karp is retained: 
> "Without 
> > > translation as integral designators"
> > >
> > 
> > 
> > --
> > Timothy Denton, BA, BCL
> > 37 Heney Street
> > Ottawa, Ontario
> > Canada K1N 5V6
> > www.tmdenton.com
> > 1 613 789 5397
> > Eastern time zone
> > 
> > 
> 
> 




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

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy