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

[Richard Tindal <richardtindal@xxxxxx>]

Alex,

Are you proposing we recommend bundled pricing (discounts) for multiple IDN 
scripts in cases where the applicant does not have financial need?

Regards

RT
    

On Aug 20, 2010, at 11:48 AM, Alex Gakuru wrote:

> 
> 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
>> 
>