RE: [gtld-council] Recommendation 20 - New Wording Proposal

[Mawaki Chango <ki_chango@xxxxxxxxx>]

Chuck,
yes I think that will do.

Mawaki

--- "Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Thanks Mawaki.  Does Philip's suggested changes cover this
> adequately?
> 
> 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: Mawaki Chango [mailto:ki_chango@xxxxxxxxx] 
> > Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2007 11:15 PM
> > To: Gomes, Chuck; Philip Sheppard;
> gtld-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: RE: [gtld-council] Recommendation 20 - New Wording
> Proposal
> > 
> > Chuck,
> > 
> > There were one or two things in my previous mail you haven't
> 
> > included in this version but, I'd only like to remind you of
> 
> > the following item (to be refined) that you've found 
> > interesting and worth considering:
> > 
> > *) the extent of the harm to the community, particularly in 
> > the case of strings based on proper names when the 
> > introduction of the proposed gTLD will leave no option to
> the 
> > targeted community in terms of a fully equivalent identifier
> 
> > to chose as (future) gTLD.
> > 
> > Mawaki
> > 
> > --- "Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > 
> > > I finally found some time to respond in more detail to
> Philip's new 
> > > wording; my comments are highlighted in the attached file.
> > > Note that
> > > the file also includes changes recommended by those on the
> 
> > Rec.20 call 
> > > that occurred earlier today.  Hopefully this will
> faciliate our 
> > > discussion in the full committee call tomorrow.  Please 
> > feel free to 
> > > comment in the meantime.
> > >  
> > > 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."
> > >  
> > > 
> > > 
> > > ________________________________
> > > 
> > >   From: owner-gtld-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > [mailto:owner-gtld-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
> Philip
> > > Sheppard
> > >   Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2007 5:34 AM
> > >   To: gtld-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > >   Subject: [gtld-council] Recommendation 20 - New Wording
> > > Proposal
> > >   
> > >   
> > >   I like Chuck's new approach very much and support the
> > > objective.
> > >   On re-reading all our efforts I see we are all confusing:
> > >   - an objective
> > >   - a process
> > >   - guidelines / definitions.
> > >    
> > >   Taking Chuck's lead I attach a new proposal which
> separates
> > > out
> > > these three.
> > >    
> > >   Does this work for everyone ?
> > >    
> > >   Philip
> > >   -----------------
> > >    
> > > 
> > > 
> > 
> > 
>