Re: [soac-newgtldapsup-wg] JAS New gTLD Applicant Support WG Charter

[Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@xxxxxxxxx>]

Eric, I haven't looked at the Redline and Blueline versions that you 
are talking about, but there is no error (that I am aware of) in my 
report of what was approved.
The IDN item was not in the WG's proposed charter (ie what Rafiq 
proposed to Council). Debbie Hughes (I think) proposed an amendment 
to add it. Cannot remember whether that was taken as friendly or 
passed, but it doesn't really matter. Wolf-Ulrich Knoben proposed an 
amendment to Jeff's new charter which included the IDN point. That 
amendment did not pass, but ultimately that one item from it was 
again proposed by Zahid Jaamil and was accepted as a friendly amendment.
Alan

At 14/01/2011 10:40 AM, Eric Brunner-Williams wrote:
> Alan,
>
> A question about the 2-up presentation of the charter texts.
>
> Looking at the original text, 1(i) read "Design mechanisms to
> encourage the build out of Internationalized Domain Names (IDNs) in
> small or underserved languages."
>
> In the Redline (Jeff Neuman's draft) version, 1(c) and 1(e), 1(f),
> 1(g), 1(h) and 1(i) are absent, in addition to other changes.
>
> In the Blueline (Avri as formated by Wolf-Urich) version, 1(c) and
> 1(e), 1(f), 1(g), 1(h) and 1(i) are present, in addition to other changes.
>
> What puzzles me is how 1(i), the item on IDNs, appears in your pdf,
> and in your textual commentary, absent from the column entitled
> "Original ALAC Charter" and present in the (narrowly approved) column
> entitled "New GNSO charter".
>
> Is this a error in transcription?
>
> Eric