Re: [gnso-idn-wg] Addition to Section 4.2.1

[subbiah <subbiah@xxxxxxxxx>]

As suggested by Ram on the call I think the following draft is a 
proposed final wording for 4.2.1 Support Statement.

I believe it includes the viewpoints/support of charles shaban, avri 
doria, werner staub (i added his point), alexei sozonov, myself, tin wee 
tan, s. maniam, sharam s., yoav keren, hong xue and possibily others. 10 
or more, if i am right.

While its not clear anyone actually objected to the version below, there 
was i believe was support against a far stronger version where 
"grandfathering" maybe give. (and that group by my count was besides 
ICANN staff - Cary and Ram and maybe Edmon). And I am not sure all 4 of 
them actually object to teh wording as it stands below. Probably not.
*
Support for considering and not penalising any pioneering, pre-existing 
developments regarding IDN gTLDs with widespread language community 
support, for example, the experimental IDN system run by the Arab 
League, China and other countries in a smaller scale when considering 
introduction of new IDN gTLDs, to avoid potential confusion/backlash.
*
Olof please tabulate support level etc. Thanks.

Subbiah


Ram Mohan wrote:

> Dear Yoav,
>
> Do I understand this correctly:
>
> If a prior experiment/development exists, including in the use of an 
> alternate root, the use of a proxy system, or DNS changes that are 
> required of local ISPs in a specific geographic region, then:
>
> - ICANN should provide backward compatibility for these alternate root 
> systems/”experimental” systems
>
> - New IDN gTLD applicants should be barred from applying for these, to 
> avoid potential confusion/backlash
>
> I appreciate your clarification.
>
> Regards,
>
> Ram
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> *From:* owner-gnso-idn-wg@xxxxxxxxx 
> [mailto:owner-gnso-idn-wg@xxxxxxxxx] *On Behalf Of *Yoav Keren
> *Sent:* Sunday, March 18, 2007 7:28 PM
> *To:* gnso-idn-wg@xxxxxxxxx
> *Subject:* [gnso-idn-wg] Addition to Section 4.2.1
>
> Ram, Olof, all,
>
> The issue in section 4.2.1 is an issue that was probably brought up 
> during a call that I have missed. First I would like to state my own 
> support for this view. Second, I think we should elaborate a little 
> more and add more examples and clarification to this point. I would 
> like to offer the following wording, which is the original one with 
> two short additions marked between 3 stars:
>
> Support for considering local/regional pre-existing developments 
> regarding IDN gTLDs, for example, the experimental IDN system run by 
> the Arab League, ***China and other countries in a smaller scale*** 
> when considering introduction of new IDN gTLDs, ***to avoid potential 
> confusion/backlash.***
>
> Thanks,
>
> Yoav



--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.413 / Virus Database: 268.18.15/728 - Release Date: 3/20/2007