Re: [ssac-gnso-irdwg] Actions/Discussion Points: 10 May Meeting

[Steve Sheng <steve.sheng@xxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Jiankang and all,

  Good point! I would think usage by regular users should be one of the primary 
reasons we discuss about different models. If we think from the user's 
perspective, transliteration would be of limited use for them. Translation is 
the best in this case, but it is expensive. Any middle ground we can think of?

Warmly,
Steve


On 5/19/10 3:00 AM, "Jiankang YAO" <yaojk@xxxxxxxx> wrote:



>Edmon noted that a more important question to address is what will the
>purpose or use of the transliterated information. He emphasized that if we 
>could
>determine who will use the information then we could decide how the 
>transliteration
>could work.

I agree with Edmon that we should know that who will be the customers of the 
transliterated information.

we should know why we do it and any benefits.

If the customers are the public users, I think that many user will not know the 
other language's transliterated information.

for example, I am chinese and know chinese and english, If i check some domain 
name information registered in Arabic characters
 in Sadi Arab and the domain names whois information are transliterated, I 
don't know Arabic and the transliterated information.
so this transliterated information is no use to me.

the persontage of people who know english is larger than the persontage of 
people who know the transliterated information of other language instead of 
native language.

if the customers are the big organziations such as FBI, the transliterated 
information is useful to them because they have enough resource to decode the 
transliterated information. of course, even the domain name information is not 
the transliterated information, they can also decode it.

if doing it without customers oriented, we may fall in "do it just because we 
want to do it " even the ascii transliterated information is no use to most of 
the public.


Jiankang Yao
CNNIC




----- Original Message -----

From:  Julie  Hedlund <mailto:julie.hedlund@xxxxxxxxx>

To: ssac-gnso-irdwg@xxxxxxxxx

Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2010 11:22 PM

Subject: [ssac-gnso-irdwg] Actions/Discussion  Points: 10 May Meeting


Dear IRD-WG members,

Below and in the attached  document are the action items and main discussion 
points for the 10 May 2010  meeting of the IRD-WG.  These also are on the wiki 
at: 
https://st.icann.org/int-reg-data-wg/index.cgi?internationalized_registration_data_working_group.
    Please let me know if you have any changes or questions.

Our next meeting is scheduled for Monday, 24 May at 1900 UTC,  12:00 PDT, 15:00 
EDT, 20:00 London, 21:00 CEST, 03:00 Beijing, 04:00 Kyoto,  07:00 NZDT (Tues 
25.05)

Best regards,

Julie

Julie  Hedlund, Director, SSAC Support

IRD-WG Meeting: 10 May 2010 at 1400  UTC

Attendees: Edmon Chung, Rafik Dammak, Jim Galvin, Jeremy  Hitchcock, and Bob 
Hutchinson; from staff: Julie Hedlund, Dave Piscitello, and  Steve Sheng.

Action Items: 1) Staff will outline a Model 4  along the lines suggested by Jim 
Galvin with assistance from Jim; 2) Staff  will develop a draft preliminary 
approach for Working Group consideration as a  basis for a Public Forum in 
Brussels.

Discussion Summary: See  attached file.