<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
Re: [gtld-council] PDP Dec 05: Follow-up to 23 June
- To: <robin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, <philip.sheppard@xxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [gtld-council] PDP Dec 05: Follow-up to 23 June
- From: "Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 07:26:31 -0400
Robin's suggestion makes sense to me.
Chuck
Sent from my GoodLink Wireless Handheld (www.good.com)
-----Original Message-----
From: Robin Gross [mailto:robin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Monday, June 25, 2007 04:09 PM Eastern Standard Time
To: philip.sheppard@xxxxxx
Cc: gtld-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [gtld-council] PDP Dec 05: Follow-up to 23 June
But there isn't consensus that strings should be rejected for non-legal
and non-technical reasons.
So perhaps we need to reach agreement on this point before we do the
word smithing.
Thanks,
Robin
philip.sheppard@xxxxxx wrote:
>Lets not lose focus on the intent of recommendation 20 and our attempt to
>clarify the wording.
>
>It is NOT about:
>- local jurisdictions, national laws etc
>
>It is about:
>- sector or community based objection.
>
>Proposed edits which drive a coach and horses through the original intent
>are somewhat disapointing to see at this closing stage of our lengthy
>community based bottom-up dialogue.
>
>Philip
>
>
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|