[CCWG-ACCT] [Acct-Staff] CCWG - Third Draft Proposal with annexes - First full version for CCWG comments (5 of many emails due to size)

Fri Nov 20 23:28:39 UTC 2015

All,

In addition to the series of emails sent by Bernie, all of the drafts for
your consideration and feedback can be found on the wiki:
https://community.icann.org/display/acctcrosscomm/Third+Draft+Report.

Thank you!
Hillary

-- 
Hillary Jett
Communications Coordinator
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)

Mobile: +1 (202) 674-3403
Email: hillary.jett at icann.org

From:  <acct-staff-bounces at icann.org> on behalf of Bernard Turcotte
<turcotte.bernard at gmail.com>
Date:  Friday, November 20, 2015 at 4:28 PM
To:  CCWG-Accountability <accountability-cross-community at icann.org>,
ACCT-Staff <acct-staff at icann.org>
Subject:  Re: [Acct-Staff] CCWG - Third Draft Proposal with annexes - First
full version for CCWG comments (5 of many emails due to size)

Annexes 8,9,10 and 11

B.

On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 4:25 PM, Bernard Turcotte
<turcotte.bernard at gmail.com> wrote:
> Annex 4
> 
> B.
> 
> On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 4:18 PM, Bernard Turcotte <turcotte.bernard at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> 
>> All,
>> 
>> As per the schedule please find attached in separate files the third draft of
>> the CCWG-Accountability Proposal and all its core annexes.
>> 
>> We have opted to present it as separate files for ease of consideration.
>> 
>> The core proposal file is aptly named CWG-3rdMainProposalV3.0 and all the
>> Annex file names conveniently start with the word Annex and the number
>> matches the recommendation
>> .
>> 
>> You will quickly realize that the main proposal is very closely based on the
>> Update that was published on the 15th of November. Its slightly bigger at
>> about 50 pages 
>> 
>> vs 30 for the update
>> 
>> document. Some of the texts have been updated or replaced given the work that
>> was carried out in developing the annexes however the core content has not
>> changed - simply how we present it. A good part of the size increase is due
>> to the comparative chart of the Mission and Core values which takes up 7
>> pages, but we felt it was critical content which needed to be in the main
>> proposal. Graphics have been updated and new ones added which also accounts
>> for some of the increase. Each Recommendation also now has a Detailed
>> Recommendations section which tries to clearly identify what will need to be
>> done for the specific Recommendation to be implemented. These changes by
>> themselves probably account for the majority increase in volume.
>> 
>> Each Annex has 4 sections
>>  completed
>> , Summary, Detailed Recommendations, Explanation, Changes from the 2nd Draft.
>> The summary is intended to be a high level functional summary of the
>> recommendation and can sometimes be the same as the text in the main
>> proposal. Detailed Recommendations should be the same as in the main
>> proposal. The 3rd section is where the detailed content is. As an example we
>> essentially copied the IRP section from the second draft into the detail
>> section of the annex 7 on IRP. The 4th section Changes is a high level
>> summary of changes from the second draft.There are additional sections but
>> these are still under development.
>> 
>> Given the size of the project and the schedule we hope you will understand
>> that staff has only been able to do a first pass at editing these. As such
>> final formatting has not been done and there will certainly be some spelling,
>> grammar and other types of nits.
>> 
>> Before being finalized the documents will be scrubbed by editors, writers and
>> formatters.
>> 
>> As you can see we have all the appropriate resources that will do their usual
>> great editing job and as such we do not require everyone to volunteer to be
>> our copy editors. It is also important to understand that line edits are a
>> big problem for staff given not everyone works to the same standards and
>> multiple line edited versions of the same document, as we learned in the
>> comment exercise on the Update document, can be divergent and require an
>> incredible amount of work to reconcile into a single version - which for the
>> volume of work we are considering in this phase would make it impossible.So
>> please, everyone, and especially our legally minded collaborators, no line
>> edits.
>> 
>> We are however looking forward to comments about content, are the
>> recommendations clear and correctly presented, is there enough information in
>> the main document, if not what is missing, is there too much information,
>> what is that, Is the material organized and structured in an effective
>> format. This is what we need at this point.
>> 
>> Therefore we look forward to your comments, as per the above caveats, on this
>> draft by 23:59UTC  Monday November 23rd.
>> 
>> B 
>> ernard Turcotte
>> ICANN Staff Support.
>> 
>> for the co-chairs and staff.
>> 
> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20151120/5a5c4828/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 4712 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20151120/5a5c4828/smime-0001.p7s>