RE: [gtld-council] Pre application assessment
- To: <gtld-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: RE: [gtld-council] Pre application assessment
- From: "Ute Decker" <Ute.Decker@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2006 14:24:55 +0100
Sorry if I missed this; will we still have the staff assessment
(220.127.116.11) and a public comment process of sorts (18.104.22.168)? Or are we
discussing the deletion of 'public pre-evaluation hearing' from 2.2
against the backdrop of deleting the public comments process from 2.5.1?
[mailto:owner-gtld-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Philip Sheppard
Sent: 23 October 2006 09:00
Subject: [gtld-council] Pre application assessment
Before we delete the wording in 2.2 on "public pre-evaluation hearings"
can we recall our
discussion on this.
I recall that we discussed and I thought all agreed that a "good idea in
principle" would be
that an applicant could check in advance in some way if his proposed
string was likely to
pass the string criteria evaluation. This would save time and money for
applicants and staff
reducing the evaluation of strings that would be finally rejected.
I agree that making this a public pre-evaluation hearing is beyond what
we discussed but it
seems an eminently sensible idea.
The ICANN department responsible for initial application evaluation
would be the right place
for a pre-application check.
The need for this to be public or a hearing is unnecessary. It should be
sufficient for the
ICANN staff department to be able to say:
"It seems possible that your proposed string would not meet the
This would merely warn an applicant of likely rejection but should not
stop a determined
applicant if they wanted to go ahead anyway.
Any dissent on this way forward?