Re: [ssac-gnso-irdwg] REMINDER FOR REVIEW: Draft Presentation for Cartagena

[Steve Sheng <steve.sheng@xxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Steven, my replies are inline:

Warmly,
Steve

On 11/17/10 3:38 PM, "Metalitz, Steven" <met@xxxxxxx> wrote:



I have some concerns with slides 11 and 12.

On slide 11: I thought it was agreed that there was no support for model
4 as presented here, which is translation into the English language (not
into a "script" -- lots of languages use basically the same script as
English).


>> This proposal is put forward by Robert Hutchinson. The uniqueness of this 
>> model is that the street, city, and country are translated. Some members 
>> expressed concerns, but overall the consensus is to include it in the 
>> discussion, even if the working group did not choose it eventually.


Furthermore, this slide may be confusing because it does not say who
"provides data" in any of the three models.  Do we mean "registrant
provides data" in each case?

>> This is true. You are right this distinction is not highlighted, let me 
>> think how to address this.


On slide 12, the model 1 examples present translation into a language
(English), not just transliteration into a script (US ASCII).  In fact,
Model 1 could look identical to model 3, the only difference being who
is responsible for changing what the registrant provides (assuming the
registrant is not providing data in US ASCII) into what is displayed in
the directory service.  In model 1, that is the registrant's
responsibility; in model 3, that is the registrar's responsibility.

>> Here is how I view the models. Other than model 2, all the information in 
>> Whois requires US-ASCII of some sort. The models differs on transliteration 
>> vs translation and registrant responsible vs registrar responsible. We can 
>> visualize in the following 2x2 table.


                                Registrants responsible     Registrars 
responsible

transliterated              model 1                             model 3

translated                  model 1                             model 4




I apologize if this is retreading old ground but I don't think we have
been clear enough on what the differences are among these models.


Steve Metalitz

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-ssac-gnso-irdwg@xxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-ssac-gnso-irdwg@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of James M. Galvin
Sent: Wednesday, November 17, 2010 6:17 PM
To: Julie Hedlund
Cc: James M. Galvin; ssac-gnso-irdwg@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [ssac-gnso-irdwg] REMINDER FOR REVIEW: Draft Presentation
for Cartagena


One more important thing we need to include is to clearly change the
vernacular.  On slide 3, Introduction, the phrase "in WHOIS services"
is highlighted in red.  I assume that's because during the presentation
you are going to introduce the phrase "directory service".  Further,
you'll explain that WHOIS is used to refer to both a protocol and a data
model.

With that, we need to be absolutely clear throughout the presentation to
use the phrases "directory service" and "registration data", expressly
not using the phrase WHOIS.

There is one use of directory services and the rest say WHOIS.

Jim





On Nov 17, 2010, at 1:09 PM, Julie Hedlund wrote:

> Dear IRD-WG members,
>
> Here is the draft presentation for Cartagena for your review, which
> includes the changes I received from Owen.  Please respond with any
> changes by COB this Thursday, 18 November so that I can prepare a
> revised draft for review prior to the discussion on our call on
> Monday, 22 November at 1600 UTC (0800 PST/1100 EST).  Please feel free

> to enter changes directly into the document and I will reconcile them
> with other comments received into one draft.
>
> Thank you very much for your assistance.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Julie
>
> <Internationalized Registration Data Interim Report Presentation Draft

> 15 Nov 2010.ppt>