as discussed during the last conference call, action on IDNs is needed.
We are expected to submit a comment on the revised IDN guidelines: http://www.icann.org/general/idn-guidelines-20sep05.htm
Also, as per the attached letter, we are expected to appoint someone to the President's IDN Committee.
About the first point, I have read the guidelines and I must confess that, given the way they are written, I will need to read them two, three, four times to have any hope of understanding what some very technical provisions actually mean.
In the meantime, I have spent an hour to recover the last draft of the IDN statement we attempted to release last December, and revise it to make it more acceptable. To explain the story to our new members, we stalled since we had strong objections from one member to recommendation 8, which at the time said that registrations should stop or be considered provisional until final policies are made. To prevent the same situation from happening, I have almost completely rewritten that recommendation, turning it into a call for an assessment. I hope that this is acceptable. I think that in the overall it is quite a good document, so I would be very happy to eventually release it.
About the second point, I would be in favour of asking for the inclusion of one At Large representative for each Region - unless there are some practical reasons not to expand the Committee too much, I think that different Regions have different problems and thus users from all of them should be represented. Also, given the importance of the matter, there is the practical point that as we are all volunteers we need to back each other when we miss calls etc (as we did in the Whois TFs).
In the call, someone suggested to look for people from ALSes as well, and that might be a good suggestion. I even think that we might want to start a small "ALAC advisory group on IDNs" if we get sufficient interest from outside the Committee.
So, my proposal is to:
- come to consensus on the IDN statement and release it
- make any additional comment that anyone might have on the revised IDN Guidelines
- ask the members from each Region to put forward a name for inclusion in the IDN Committee, or reply that they're not interested (which might be reasonable in some cases, for example for NA)
Does this sound reasonable? Please comment.
Ciao, -- vb. [Vittorio Bertola - v.bertola [a] bertola.eu.org]<----- http://bertola.eu.org/ <- Prima o poi...
ALAC position on IDN - draft 6.doc