Re: [soac-newgtldapsup-wg] My comments on the draft final report

[Alex Gakuru <gakuru@xxxxxxxxx>]

Hi,

I get what Andrew and Eric are saying and I agree.  Bundled pricing
makes sense to me, and I think we should include this in our
recommendations, even if we may need to finalize some of the details
later.

The way I see it this is effectively a "digital divide" issue - since
anything we can do to get more scripts in the root from smaller
languages at least helps them keep pace and thus fits our mandate.

Alex

On Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 5:19 AM, Andrew Mack <amack@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Eric,
>
> Thanks for these excellent examples.  This was the hope when we started
> looking at the idea of bundling as a kind of support -- to promote exactly
> the kinds of scripts that are likely to be left out if the choice for them
> is full price or nothing.
>
> Your mention of India is spot on.  For someone wishing to reach as much of
> India as possible, a bulk price/bundling incentive that would make it
> economically more viable build out in all of the scripts of the country
> seems to me to be a benefit for the language communities, a benefit for the
> economy of India and a benefit for the group/company/organization trying to
> reach the country.  For a government hoping to promote development in all
> parts of a country -- including those with minority languages/scripts -- I
> think this is good news as well, since the last thing they want is to see
> their internal digital divides increase.
>
> Not sure how many groups would find the "bulk pricing" a true incentive, but
> based on the comments in Brussels it does seem worth considering.
>
> Andrew
>
> Andrew A. Mack
> Principal
> AMGlobal Consulting
>
> +1-202-256-1077
> amack@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> www.amglobal.com
>
> ________________________________
> From: Eric Brunner-Williams <ebw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: carlos aguirre <carlosaguirre62@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: tijani.benjemaa@xxxxxxxx; soac-newgtldapsup-wg@xxxxxxxxx
> Sent: Thu, August 19, 2010 12:52:47 PM
> Subject: Re: [soac-newgtldapsup-wg] My comments on the draft final report
>
>
> Carlos,
>
> This just addresses scripts and strings, to which you commented "I think
> this need to be better explained , because is a little complicated to
> understand. at least for me."
>
>
> Assume an application for "africa", and ignore the GAC regional name issue.
>
> Assume the application is "qualified".
>
> The applicant offers the claim that at least one string in each of two
> scripts, Latin and Arabic, is necessary.
>
> Which outcome is preferable?
>
>     (a) the Arabic script string is delegated to registry operator AS-RegOp,
> and the Latin script string is delegated to a distinct registry operator
> LS-RegOp, or
>     (b) both Arabic script string and the Latin script string are delegated
> to a single registry operator AS+LS-RegOp.
>
>
> Assume an application for "reproductive rights" by an organization domiciled
> in India.
>
> Assume the application is "qualified".
>
> There are 11 scripts used by government in India, and 22 languages, with
> some scripts and some languages used in neighboring states.
>
> What is the cost to the applicant to deliver registry services?
>
> If there is a substantial cost, then applicants will have to choose what
> scripts, and languages, and the associated users, to abandon, and if their
> decisions are made by rational economic analysis, will eliminate lesser
> taught and minority languages from their service profile.
>
> I hope these two examples clarify why linguistic diversity is an element of
> need.
>
> Eric
>