"Open" is not the opposite of "community-based"
The Draft Applicant Guidebook calls TLDs "Open" when they are not "Community-based" (see Glossary pages G-2 and G-5 as well as page 4-6). The word "open" is misnomer and leads serious follow-on errors. A defined community does not necessarily have a "restricted population". The policies of a community-based TLD do not necessarily have to restrict access to card-carrying community members. Conversely, a Non-community-based TLD is not necessarily open. The determinant factor is not openness/closedness, but the appropriate source of governance. A Community-based TLD is one that must primarily be subject to the governance of the respective community, as opposed to the non-specific governance of ICANN. This is the case when the ICANN community at large is neither equipped nor legitimated to provide governance in that field. I propose to replace "Open" with "Non-community-based" and to change the definitions in the Glossary as follows: "Community-based TLD: A Community-based gTLD is a gTLD that is operated under the governance of a defined community with a specific purpose or an identifiable population. An applicant designating its application as Community-based must be prepared to substantiate its status as being a collective representative organization for the community it names in the application, or as being fully accountable to such an organization." "Non-community-based TLD: A Non-community-based TLD can be used for any purpose consistent with the requirements of the application and evaluation criteria, and with the registry agreement. A non-community-based TLD may or may not have a formal relationship with an exclusive registrant or user population. It may or may not employ eligibility checks or use restrictions." Werner Staub -- --- CORE Internet Council of Registrars http://corenic.org WTC II, 29 route de Pre-Bois, CH-1215 Geneva, Switzerland Tel +4122 929-5744 Fax +4122 929-5745 secretariat@xxxxxxxxxxx