From c.dillon at ucl.ac.uk Mon Feb 3 14:31:44 2014 From: c.dillon at ucl.ac.uk (Dillon, Chris) Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2014 14:31:44 +0000 Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] RE: Action re: Questions In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <082bce8335904f8ab2f627846f4ebeab@DB3PR01MB234.eurprd01.prod.exchangelabs.com> Dear colleagues, As promised, I am circulating some comments about the questions, in case we have time to speak about them on Thursday. Today I'm looking at no.1: * I'm not aware of any contradictions in the various definitions given in no.1, although there is some duplication. * "Contact information as defined by the EWG on GTLD Directory Services" includes the phrase "It should be mandatory for Registries and Registrars to provide". Are we happy with that? It is closely linked to no.3 (Who gets access to what information?). Regards, Chris. -- Research Associate in Linguistic Computing, Centre for Digital Humanities, UCL, Gower St, London WC1E 6BT Tel +44 20 7679 1599 (int 31599) ucl.ac.uk/dis/people/chrisdillon From: owner-gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org [mailto:owner-gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org] On Behalf Of Julie Hedlund Sent: 23 January 2014 15:35 To: gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] Action re: Questions Importance: High Dear PDP WG members, Staff have created wiki pages for each of the proposed questions. See the links below. During today's call the WG agreed to begin to refine these questions. Please send any suggested text to the list, or alternately you may post it to the wiki page established for each question. 1. What is contact information & What Taxonomies are Available? 2. Why are we doing this? Is this particular feature necessary? 3. Who gets access to what information? 4. Who are the stakeholders? Who is affected and what do they want? 5. How much would a particular feature cost and how to weigh the costs versus the benefits? 6. When would policy come into effect? 7. What should be mandatory? Best regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lars.hoffmann at icann.org Mon Feb 3 14:59:51 2014 From: lars.hoffmann at icann.org (Lars Hoffmann) Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2014 06:59:51 -0800 Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] RE: Action re: Questions Message-ID: Dear all, Before I would like to suggest to send out the letter to the following GAC representatives ? bearing in mind that we can always add more to the list: China Egypt European Union Greece Hong Kong India Japan Korea Oman Russia Serbia UAE You can the full list of GAC representatives here: https://gacweb.icann.org/display/gacweb/GAC+Representatives If you agree with this list (bearing in mind it's non exhaustive), please let me know and I will send it to the various representatives on behalf of the Group. Many thanks and best wishes, Lars From: , Chris > Date: Monday, February 3, 2014 3:31 PM To: "gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org" > Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] RE: Action re: Questions Dear colleagues, As promised, I am circulating some comments about the questions, in case we have time to speak about them on Thursday. Today I?m looking at no.1: ? I?m not aware of any contradictions in the various definitions given in no.1, although there is some duplication. ? ?Contact information as defined by the EWG on GTLD Directory Services? includes the phrase ?It should be mandatory for Registries and Registrars to provide?. Are we happy with that? It is closely linked to no.3 (Who gets access to what information?). Regards, Chris. -- Research Associate in Linguistic Computing, Centre for Digital Humanities, UCL, Gower St, London WC1E 6BT Tel +44 20 7679 1599 (int 31599) ucl.ac.uk/dis/people/chrisdillon From: owner-gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org [mailto:owner-gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org] On Behalf Of Julie Hedlund Sent: 23 January 2014 15:35 To: gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] Action re: Questions Importance: High Dear PDP WG members, Staff have created wiki pages for each of the proposed questions. See the links below. During today's call the WG agreed to begin to refine these questions. Please send any suggested text to the list, or alternately you may post it to the wiki page established for each question. 1. What is contact information & What Taxonomies are Available? 2. Why are we doing this? Is this particular feature necessary? 3. Who gets access to what information? 4. Who are the stakeholders? Who is affected and what do they want? 5. How much would a particular feature cost and how to weigh the costs versus the benefits? 6. When would policy come into effect? 7. What should be mandatory? Best regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From steve.sheng at icann.org Mon Feb 3 17:11:40 2014 From: steve.sheng at icann.org (Steve Sheng) Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2014 09:11:40 -0800 Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] Re: Draft Agenda for Meeting invitation: Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information PDP Working Group Thursday 06 February 2014 14:00 UTC In-Reply-To: Message-ID: From: Julie Hedlund Date: Friday, January 31, 2014 10:25 AM To: "Dillon, Chris" , "gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org" Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] Re: Draft Agenda for Meeting invitation: Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information PDP Working Group Thursday 06 February 2014 14:00 UTC > 5. Update from Steve Sheng on Study Group to Evaluate Available Solutions for > the Submission and Display of Internationalized Contact Data. Thanks Julie and Chris, the study team (copied here) is happy to be on the call to provide an update and answer questions. Please find below is a written summary and a request for feedback on a registrar and registry survey. The purpose of the study is to: 1. Document the submission and display practices of internationalized registration data at a representative set of gTLD and ccTLD registries and registrars. 2. Investigate and document how other e-merchants or web sites manage internationalized contact data. 3. Consider and assess the cost and functionality of commercial, open source, or other known but as yet not widely implemented solutions for 1) transliterating internationalized contact information to US-ASCII, 2) translating internationalized contact information to English, 3) transcribing internationalized contact information to US-ASCII, or 4) a mixture of translation, transliteration and transcription. 4. Consider and assess the accuracy implications for transliteration and translation of the internationalized contact data 5. Based on practices documented in 1 and understanding the issues raised in 3 and 4 and best practices by other e-merchants in 2, summarize some common best practices registry/registrar could do to minimize these variations, if translation and/or transliteration is deemed necessary. The study team is currently on the first task, and has prepared a registry and registrar survey to complete. Since this group is closely working in this area, we appreciate very much if you have any feedback on these survey questions. Such feedback will help us to make sure we ask the right questions. Your feedback by 12 February is much appreciated. More information about the study can be found here: https://community.icann.org/display/whoisird/Study+to+Evaluate+Available+Sol utions+for+the+Submission+and+Display+of+Internationalized+Contact+Data Kind regards, Steve -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: survey-registry.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 76768 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: survey-registrar.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 59992 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 5023 bytes Desc: not available URL: From nathalie.peregrine at icann.org Mon Feb 3 20:43:00 2014 From: nathalie.peregrine at icann.org (Nathalie Peregrine) Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2014 12:43:00 -0800 Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] PLEASE RSVP FOR DIAL IN DETAILS: Continuation of GNSO WG Newcomer Open House Sessions In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: http://gnso.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-28jan14-en.htm Continuation of GNSO WG Newcomer Open House Sessions Following a successful GNSO WG Newcomer Open House session pilot session in December of last year, we would like to continue with these sessions to allow for new GNSO WG participants to come together and ask any questions they may have about GNSO Working Groups, procedures and/or processes. We know there is a lot of information to digest when you join a GNSO Working Group and would like to offer this opportunity to come together, talk and answer any questions you may have. To allow for maximum participation in these calls, the proposed schedule is as follows: Thursday 6 February at 12.00 UTC Thursday 6 March at 20.00 UTC Thursday 3 April at 12.00 UTC Thursday 1 May at 20.00 UTC Thursday 5 June at 12.00 UTC Thursday 3 July at 20.00 UTC Thursday 7 August at 12.00 UTC Thursday 4 September at 20.00 UTC Thursday 2 October at 12.00 UTC Thursday 6 November at 20.00 UTC Thursday 4 December at 12.00 UTC To convert to your local time zone, please see http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/converter.html. If you are interested to join the next meeting on 6 February or any of the future meetings, please let the GNSO Secretariat know (gnso-secs at icann.org) and they will send you the call details. If there are any specific questions you already have, or any overviews or introductions you think would be helpful (e.g. GNSO Policy Development Process or GNSO Working Group guidelines), please let us know in advance and we will prepare materials accordingly. Feel free to share this invitation with others that you think may be interested. We look forward to welcoming you at the next meeting! Glen de Saint G?ry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat at gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lars.hoffmann at icann.org Tue Feb 4 08:51:13 2014 From: lars.hoffmann at icann.org (Lars Hoffmann) Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2014 00:51:13 -0800 Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] Requests Message-ID: Dear all, Just to confirm that the requests to the GNSO Stakeholder Groups and Constituencies as well as those to the ICANN Advisory Committees and Support Organizations have all been sent out. The letter to the GAC has also been sent and as soon as we hear back from you about the list of GAC representatives I will send those on their way too. Best wishes, Lars -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From c.dillon at ucl.ac.uk Tue Feb 4 09:11:36 2014 From: c.dillon at ucl.ac.uk (Dillon, Chris) Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2014 09:11:36 +0000 Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] RE: Action re: Questions In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Dear Lars and colleagues, It's a good start. Let's add Pakistan, Thailand and Ukraine. Regards, Chris. -- Research Associate in Linguistic Computing, Centre for Digital Humanities, UCL, Gower St, London WC1E 6BT Tel +44 20 7679 1599 (int 31599) ucl.ac.uk/dis/people/chrisdillon From: owner-gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org [mailto:owner-gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org] On Behalf Of Lars Hoffmann Sent: 03 February 2014 15:00 To: gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org Subject: Re: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] RE: Action re: Questions Dear all, Before I would like to suggest to send out the letter to the following GAC representatives - bearing in mind that we can always add more to the list: China Egypt European Union Greece Hong Kong India Japan Korea Oman Russia Serbia UAE You can the full list of GAC representatives here: https://gacweb.icann.org/display/gacweb/GAC+Representatives If you agree with this list (bearing in mind it's non exhaustive), please let me know and I will send it to the various representatives on behalf of the Group. Many thanks and best wishes, Lars -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lars.hoffmann at icann.org Tue Feb 4 09:20:45 2014 From: lars.hoffmann at icann.org (Lars Hoffmann) Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2014 01:20:45 -0800 Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] RE: Action re: Questions In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Thanks, Chris! I will add those three and sent out the letters right away ? we can always add over the course of the coming days/weeks. Best, Lars From: , Chris > Date: Tuesday, February 4, 2014 10:11 AM To: Lars Hoffmann >, "gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org" > Subject: RE: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] RE: Action re: Questions Dear Lars and colleagues, It?s a good start. Let?s add Pakistan, Thailand and Ukraine. Regards, Chris. -- Research Associate in Linguistic Computing, Centre for Digital Humanities, UCL, Gower St, London WC1E 6BT Tel +44 20 7679 1599 (int 31599) ucl.ac.uk/dis/people/chrisdillon From: owner-gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org [mailto:owner-gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org] On Behalf Of Lars Hoffmann Sent: 03 February 2014 15:00 To: gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org Subject: Re: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] RE: Action re: Questions Dear all, Before I would like to suggest to send out the letter to the following GAC representatives ? bearing in mind that we can always add more to the list: China Egypt European Union Greece Hong Kong India Japan Korea Oman Russia Serbia UAE You can the full list of GAC representatives here: https://gacweb.icann.org/display/gacweb/GAC+Representatives If you agree with this list (bearing in mind it's non exhaustive), please let me know and I will send it to the various representatives on behalf of the Group. Many thanks and best wishes, Lars -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Glen at icann.org Thu Feb 6 18:02:28 2014 From: Glen at icann.org (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Glen_de_Saint_G=E9ry?=) Date: Thu, 6 Feb 2014 10:02:28 -0800 Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] Attendance, Presentation & MP3: Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information PDP WG meeting - 6 February 2014 Message-ID: Dear All, Please find the MP3 recording for the Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information PDP Charter Drafting Team call held on Thursday 6 February at 14:00 UTC at: http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-transliteration-contact-20140206-en.mp3 On page: http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar#feb Steve Sheng's presentation may be viewed directly http://gnso.icann.org/en/correspondence/presentation-feasibility-study-06feb14-en.pdf on page http://gnso.icann.org/en/council/correspondence The recordings and transcriptions of the calls are posted on the GNSO Master Calendar page: http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/ Attendees: Chris Dillon - NCSG Patrick Lenihan- NCUC Jim Galvin - SSAC Marc Blanchet - No SOI Justine Chew - At-Large Pitinan Koarmornpatna - GAC Patrick Lenihan - NCUC Ching Chiao - RySg Jennifer Chung - RySG Ahkuputra Wanawit - GAC Wolf Knoben - ISPCP Simon Perreault - No SOI Wolf-Ulrich Knoben - ISPCP Mae Suchayapim Siriwat - GAC Apologies: Ephriam Percy Kenyanito ICANN staff: Julie Hedlund Lars Hoffman Margie Milam Steve Sheng Glen de Saint Gery Nathalie Peregrine ** Please let me know if your name has been left off the list ** Wiki page: http://tinyurl.com/mpwxstx Thank you. Kind regards, Glen Glen de Saint G?ry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat at gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org Adobe Chat Transcript for Thursday 6 February 2014: Lars Hoffmann:Welcome to the Translation and Transliteration PDP WG on 6 February 2013 Ching Chiao (DotAsia):Ching Chiao :-) Ching Chiao (DotAsia):I am only on Adobe Ching Chiao (DotAsia):Glen please also note my participation, thanks! Ching Chiao (DotAsia):@Margie -- does EWG have the chance to cover other three recommendations from the IRD-WG report (especially access to WHOIS, both web and port 43, for IDN TLDs ? Ching Chiao (DotAsia):sure thanks for the response Peter Green:An announcement from ICANN Peter Green:http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-2-05feb14-en.htm Justine Chew:@Steve, do you have some timelines for the other tasks you've listed in your email? Steve Sheng:Thanks Justine, my estimate would be before London meeting. Ching Chiao (DotAsia):sorry have to cut off for another meeting. will listen to recording. tks chris and everyone Julie Hedlund:Thank you very much for your participation Ching Julie Hedlund:@Chris: This is the definition in the IRD-WG report: "Transliteration: The process of representing the characters of an alphabetical or syllabic system of writing by the characters of a conversion alphabet. " Marc Blanchet:I would suggest to use "transformation" if people want to cover all kind of transformations (transliteration, translation, romanization,...). We are currently using "transformation" in the study when want to talk about any kind. Julie Hedlund:@Chris: This is the definition in the Final Issue Report: "Transliterationistheprocessofrepresentingthecharactersofanalphabeticalorsyllabicsystemofwritingbythecharactersofaconversionalphabet.Iftransliterationweredesired,thenthe"mustbepresent"scriptwouldbetheLatinscript.Iftranslationweredesired,thenthe"mustbepresent"languagewouldbeEnglish." Julie Hedlund:Sorry about the lack of format! Marc Blanchet:agree. depends on the need. Peter Green:agree too. Transformation covers all kinds of change Julie Hedlund:@Wolf-Ulrich: There is the definition for "translation" in the Final Issue Report, "Translation is the process of conveying the meaning of some passage of text in one language, so that it can be expressed equivalently in another language.. Steve Sheng:Thanks Chris, this is good feedback, perhaps in the survey we ought to consider the definitions first as well. Julie Hedlund:@Steve: you might want to consider including definitions at the start of the survey, as in a taxonomy. Steve Sheng:yes Marc Blanchet:definitions as pointers. We don't want to overload the survey itself. People have lvery short attention time to surveys. Lars Hoffmann:And i would also like to thank Glen for her help with this! Julie Hedlund:Yes thank you very much Glen! Pitinan Kooarmornpatana:thanks Jim Galvin:thanks bye! Julie Hedlund:Thank you everyone! WANAWIT Ahkuputra:thanks chris Chris Dillon:Thank you! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From julie.hedlund at icann.org Thu Feb 6 18:43:31 2014 From: julie.hedlund at icann.org (Julie Hedlund) Date: Thu, 6 Feb 2014 10:43:31 -0800 Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] Actions: PDP WG on Translation/Transliteration of Contact Info Message-ID: Dear PDP WG members, Please see below the actions from our meeting on 06 February. These also are posted to the wiki page at:https://community.icann.org/display/tatcipdp/06+February+2014. Actions: 1. Ching Chao will convey to the Council the PDP WG's request to get an agenda item on the Council meeting on 27 February so that the WG can bring to the Council its request for input. 2. Proposed Questions: Ask WG members to continue to suggest refinements on the list and the wiki. Question 1 -- ADD: What is the definition of translation and transliteration? Questions 3 & 4: Consider whether there are related questions or links to existing information. > 1. What is contact information (review and expand on the taxonomies)? > > 2. Why are we doing this?; is this particular feature necessary? > > 3. Who gets access to what? > > 4. Who are the stakeholders?; who is affected? and what do they want (linking > back to What)? > > 5. How much would a particular feature cost and how to weigh the costs versus > the benefits? > > 6. When would policy come into effect? > > 7. What should be mandatory? Best regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 5041 bytes Desc: not available URL: From aelsadr at egyptig.org Thu Feb 6 21:17:28 2014 From: aelsadr at egyptig.org (Amr Elsadr) Date: Thu, 6 Feb 2014 22:17:28 +0100 Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] Attendance, Presentation & MP3: Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information PDP WG meeting - 6 February 2014 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi, I apologize for missing today?s call. I had intended to be on it, but was delayed in another meeting that took longer than it should have. Thanks. Amr On Feb 6, 2014, at 7:02 PM, Glen de Saint G?ry wrote: > Dear All, > > Please find the MP3 recording for the Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information PDP Charter Drafting Team call held on Thursday 6 February at 14:00 UTC at: > http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-transliteration-contact-20140206-en.mp3 > On page: > http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar#feb > > Steve Sheng?s presentation may be viewed directly > http://gnso.icann.org/en/correspondence/presentation-feasibility-study-06feb14-en.pdf > on page > http://gnso.icann.org/en/council/correspondence > > The recordings and transcriptions of the calls are posted on the GNSO > Master Calendar page: > http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/ > > Attendees: > Chris Dillon - NCSG > Patrick Lenihan- NCUC > Jim Galvin - SSAC > Marc Blanchet ? No SOI > Justine Chew ? At-Large > Pitinan Koarmornpatna - GAC > Patrick Lenihan - NCUC > Ching Chiao - RySg > Jennifer Chung - RySG > Ahkuputra Wanawit - GAC > Wolf Knoben - ISPCP > Simon Perreault - No SOI > Wolf-Ulrich Knoben ? ISPCP > Mae Suchayapim Siriwat - GAC > > Apologies: > Ephriam Percy Kenyanito > > ICANN staff: > Julie Hedlund > Lars Hoffman > Margie Milam > Steve Sheng > Glen de Saint Gery > Nathalie Peregrine > > ** Please let me know if your name has been left off the list ** > > > Wiki page: http://tinyurl.com/mpwxstx > > Thank you. > Kind regards, > Glen > > Glen de Saint G?ry > GNSO Secretariat > gnso.secretariat at gnso.icann.org > http://gnso.icann.org > > Adobe Chat Transcript for Thursday 6 February 2014: > > Lars Hoffmann:Welcome to the Translation and Transliteration PDP WG on 6 February 2013 > Ching Chiao (DotAsia):Ching Chiao :-) > Ching Chiao (DotAsia):I am only on Adobe > Ching Chiao (DotAsia):Glen please also note my participation, thanks! > Ching Chiao (DotAsia):@Margie -- does EWG have the chance to cover other three recommendations from the IRD-WG report (especially access to WHOIS, both web and port 43, for IDN TLDs ? > Ching Chiao (DotAsia):sure thanks for the response > Peter Green:An announcement from ICANN > Peter Green:http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-2-05feb14-en.htm > Justine Chew:@Steve, do you have some timelines for the other tasks you've listed in your email? > Steve Sheng:Thanks Justine, my estimate would be before London meeting. > Ching Chiao (DotAsia):sorry have to cut off for another meeting. will listen to recording. tks chris and everyone > Julie Hedlund:Thank you very much for your participation Ching > Julie Hedlund:@Chris: This is the definition in the IRD-WG report: "Transliteration: The process of representing the characters of an alphabetical or syllabic system of writing by the characters of a conversion alphabet. " > Marc Blanchet:I would suggest to use "transformation" if people want to cover all kind of transformations (transliteration, translation, romanization,...). We are currently using "transformation" in the study when want to talk about any kind. > Julie Hedlund:@Chris: This is the definition in the Final Issue Report: "Transliterationistheprocessofrepresentingthecharactersofanalphabeticalorsyllabicsystemofwritingbythecharactersofaconversionalphabet.Iftransliterationweredesired,thenthe?mustbepresent?scriptwouldbetheLatinscript.Iftranslationweredesired,thenthe?mustbepresent?languagewouldbeEnglish." > Julie Hedlund:Sorry about the lack of format! > Marc Blanchet:agree. depends on the need. > Peter Green:agree too. Transformation covers all kinds of change > Julie Hedlund:@Wolf-Ulrich: There is the definition for "translation" in the Final Issue Report, "Translation is the process of conveying the meaning of some passage of text in one language, so that it can be expressed equivalently in another language.. > Steve Sheng:Thanks Chris, this is good feedback, perhaps in the survey we ought to consider the definitions first as well. > Julie Hedlund:@Steve: you might want to consider including definitions at the start of the survey, as in a taxonomy. > Steve Sheng:yes > Marc Blanchet:definitions as pointers. We don't want to overload the survey itself. People have lvery short attention time to surveys. > Lars Hoffmann:And i would also like to thank Glen for her help with this! > Julie Hedlund:Yes thank you very much Glen! > Pitinan Kooarmornpatana:thanks > Jim Galvin:thanks bye! > Julie Hedlund:Thank you everyone! > WANAWIT Ahkuputra:thanks chris > Chris Dillon:Thank you! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rudi.vansnick at isoc.be Thu Feb 6 21:38:05 2014 From: rudi.vansnick at isoc.be (Rudi Vansnick) Date: Thu, 6 Feb 2014 22:38:05 +0100 Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] Attendance, Presentation & MP3: Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information PDP WG meeting - 6 February 2014 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Dear Glen, Dear all, I have to mention I informed Chris Dillon about my unavailability due to hospital visit. Please take note of my apologies. Kind regards, Rudi Vansnick NPOC chair Policy Committee NPOC treasurer rudi.vansnick at npoc.org Tel : +32 (0)9 329 39 16 Mobile : +32 (0)475 28 16 32 www.npoc.org Op 6-feb.-2014, om 19:02 heeft Glen de Saint G?ry het volgende geschreven: > Dear All, > > Please find the MP3 recording for the Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information PDP Charter Drafting Team call held on Thursday 6 February at 14:00 UTC at: > http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-transliteration-contact-20140206-en.mp3 > On page: > http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar#feb > > Steve Sheng?s presentation may be viewed directly > http://gnso.icann.org/en/correspondence/presentation-feasibility-study-06feb14-en.pdf > on page > http://gnso.icann.org/en/council/correspondence > > The recordings and transcriptions of the calls are posted on the GNSO > Master Calendar page: > http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/ > > Attendees: > Chris Dillon - NCSG > Patrick Lenihan- NCUC > Jim Galvin - SSAC > Marc Blanchet ? No SOI > Justine Chew ? At-Large > Pitinan Koarmornpatna - GAC > Patrick Lenihan - NCUC > Ching Chiao - RySg > Jennifer Chung - RySG > Ahkuputra Wanawit - GAC > Wolf Knoben - ISPCP > Simon Perreault - No SOI > Wolf-Ulrich Knoben ? ISPCP > Mae Suchayapim Siriwat - GAC > > Apologies: > Ephriam Percy Kenyanito > > ICANN staff: > Julie Hedlund > Lars Hoffman > Margie Milam > Steve Sheng > Glen de Saint Gery > Nathalie Peregrine > > ** Please let me know if your name has been left off the list ** > > > Wiki page: http://tinyurl.com/mpwxstx > > Thank you. > Kind regards, > Glen > > Glen de Saint G?ry > GNSO Secretariat > gnso.secretariat at gnso.icann.org > http://gnso.icann.org > > Adobe Chat Transcript for Thursday 6 February 2014: > > Lars Hoffmann:Welcome to the Translation and Transliteration PDP WG on 6 February 2013 > Ching Chiao (DotAsia):Ching Chiao :-) > Ching Chiao (DotAsia):I am only on Adobe > Ching Chiao (DotAsia):Glen please also note my participation, thanks! > Ching Chiao (DotAsia):@Margie -- does EWG have the chance to cover other three recommendations from the IRD-WG report (especially access to WHOIS, both web and port 43, for IDN TLDs ? > Ching Chiao (DotAsia):sure thanks for the response > Peter Green:An announcement from ICANN > Peter Green:http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-2-05feb14-en.htm > Justine Chew:@Steve, do you have some timelines for the other tasks you've listed in your email? > Steve Sheng:Thanks Justine, my estimate would be before London meeting. > Ching Chiao (DotAsia):sorry have to cut off for another meeting. will listen to recording. tks chris and everyone > Julie Hedlund:Thank you very much for your participation Ching > Julie Hedlund:@Chris: This is the definition in the IRD-WG report: "Transliteration: The process of representing the characters of an alphabetical or syllabic system of writing by the characters of a conversion alphabet. " > Marc Blanchet:I would suggest to use "transformation" if people want to cover all kind of transformations (transliteration, translation, romanization,...). We are currently using "transformation" in the study when want to talk about any kind. > Julie Hedlund:@Chris: This is the definition in the Final Issue Report: "Transliterationistheprocessofrepresentingthecharactersofanalphabeticalorsyllabicsystemofwritingbythecharactersofaconversionalphabet.Iftransliterationweredesired,thenthe?mustbepresent?scriptwouldbetheLatinscript.Iftranslationweredesired,thenthe?mustbepresent?languagewouldbeEnglish." > Julie Hedlund:Sorry about the lack of format! > Marc Blanchet:agree. depends on the need. > Peter Green:agree too. Transformation covers all kinds of change > Julie Hedlund:@Wolf-Ulrich: There is the definition for "translation" in the Final Issue Report, "Translation is the process of conveying the meaning of some passage of text in one language, so that it can be expressed equivalently in another language.. > Steve Sheng:Thanks Chris, this is good feedback, perhaps in the survey we ought to consider the definitions first as well. > Julie Hedlund:@Steve: you might want to consider including definitions at the start of the survey, as in a taxonomy. > Steve Sheng:yes > Marc Blanchet:definitions as pointers. We don't want to overload the survey itself. People have lvery short attention time to surveys. > Lars Hoffmann:And i would also like to thank Glen for her help with this! > Julie Hedlund:Yes thank you very much Glen! > Pitinan Kooarmornpatana:thanks > Jim Galvin:thanks bye! > Julie Hedlund:Thank you everyone! > WANAWIT Ahkuputra:thanks chris > Chris Dillon:Thank you! > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From petter.rindforth at fenixlegal.eu Thu Feb 6 22:01:19 2014 From: petter.rindforth at fenixlegal.eu (Petter Rindforth) Date: Thu, 06 Feb 2014 22:01:19 GMT Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] Attendance, Presentation & MP3: Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information PDP WG meeting - 6 February 2014 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <1391724079672.13740.31576@webmail9> Dear All, Please not that I informed on January 28, 2013 thatr I could not participate in today's call. Best, Petter ---------- Vidarebefordrat meddelande ---------- Fr?n: Petter Rindforth Datum: Tue Jan 28 2014 01:16:53 GMT+0100 (V?steuropa, normaltid) ?mne: Re: [ntfy-gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] Meeting invitation: Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information PDP Working Group Thursday 06 February 2014 14:00 UTC Till: Nathalie Peregrine Cc: ntfy-gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org, gnso-secs at icann.org Hi, Unfortunately, i will not be able to participate on February 6, as I have a court dispute (main hearing) that will go on the full day. Best, Petter --? Petter Rindforth, LL M -- Petter Rindforth, LL M Fenix Legal KB Stureplan 4c, 4tr 114 35 Stockholm Sweden Fax: +46(0)8-4631010 Direct phone: +46(0)702-369360 E-mail: petter.rindforth at fenixlegal.eu www.fenixlegal.eu NOTICE This e-mail message is intended solely for the individual or individuals to whom it is addressed. It may contain confidential attorney-client privileged information and attorney work product. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are requested not to read, copy or distribute it or any of the information it contains. Please delete it immediately and notify us by return e-mail. Fenix Legal KB, Sweden, www.fenixlegal.eu Thank you 6 februari 2014, Glen de Saint G?ry skrev: > > Dear All, > > > > Please find the MP3 recording for the Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information PDP Charter Drafting Team call held on?Thursday 6 February at?14:00?UTC at: > > > > On page: > > > > Steve Sheng?s presentation may be viewed directly > > > > on page > > > > > > The recordings and transcriptions of the calls are posted on the GNSO > > Master Calendar page: > > > > > > Attendees: > > Chris Dillon - NCSG > > Patrick Lenihan- NCUC > > Jim Galvin - SSAC > > Marc Blanchet ? No SOI > > Justine Chew ? At-Large > > Pitinan Koarmornpatna - GAC > > Patrick Lenihan - NCUC > > Ching Chiao - RySg > > Jennifer Chung - RySG > > Ahkuputra Wanawit - GAC > > Wolf Knoben - ISPCP > > Simon Perreault - No SOI > > Wolf-Ulrich Knoben ? ISPCP > Mae Suchayapim Siriwat - GAC > > Apologies: Ephriam Percy Kenyanito > > > > ICANN staff: > > Julie Hedlund > > Lars Hoffman > > Margie Milam > Steve Sheng > > Glen de Saint Gery > > Nathalie Peregrine > > > > ** Please let me know if your name has been left off the list ** > > > > > > Wiki page: > > > > Thank you. > > Kind regards, > > Glen > > Glen de Saint G?ry > > GNSO Secretariat > > gnso.secretariat at gnso.icann.org > > http://gnso.icann.org > > > > Adobe ChatTranscript for Thursday 6 February 2014: > > > > Lars Hoffmann:Welcome to the Translation and Transliteration PDP WG on 6 February 2013 > > Ching Chiao (DotAsia):Ching Chiao :-) > > Ching Chiao (DotAsia):I am only on Adobe > > Ching Chiao (DotAsia):Glen please also note my participation, thanks! > > Ching Chiao (DotAsia):@Margie -- does EWG have the chance to cover other three recommendations from the IRD-WG report (especially access to WHOIS, both web and port 43, for IDN TLDs ? > > Ching Chiao (DotAsia):sure thanks for the response > > Peter Green:An announcement from ICANN > > Peter Green:http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-2-05feb14-en.htm > > Justine Chew:@Steve, do you have some timelines for the other tasks you've listed in your email? > > Steve Sheng:Thanks Justine, my estimate would be before London meeting. > > Ching Chiao (DotAsia):sorry have to cut off for another meeting. will listen to recording. tks chris and everyone > > Julie Hedlund:Thank you very much for your participation Ching > > Julie Hedlund:@Chris: This is the definition in the IRD-WG report: "Transliteration: The process of representing the characters of an alphabetical or syllabic system of writing by the characters of a conversion alphabet. " > > Marc Blanchet:I would suggest to use "transformation" if people want to cover all kind of transformations (transliteration, translation, romanization,...). We are currently using "transformation" in the study when want to talk about any kind. > > Julie Hedlund:@Chris: This is the definition in the Final Issue Report: "Transliterationistheprocessofrepresentingthecharactersofanalphabeticalorsyllabicsystemofwritingbythecharactersofaconversionalphabet.Iftransliterationweredesired,thenthe?mustbepresent?scriptwouldbetheLatinscript.Iftranslationweredesired,thenthe?mustbepresent?languagewouldbeEnglish." > > Julie Hedlund:Sorry about the lack of format! > > Marc Blanchet:agree. depends on the need. > > Peter Green:agree too. Transformation covers all kinds of change > > Julie Hedlund:@Wolf-Ulrich: There is the definition for "translation" in the Final Issue Report, "Translation is the process of conveying the meaning of some passage of text in one language, so that it can be expressed equivalently in another language.. > > Steve Sheng:Thanks Chris, this is good feedback, perhaps in the survey we ought to consider the definitions first as well. > > Julie Hedlund:@Steve: you might want to consider including definitions at the start of the survey, as in a taxonomy. > > Steve Sheng:yes > > Marc Blanchet:definitions as pointers. We don't want to overload the survey itself. People have lvery short attention time to surveys. > > Lars Hoffmann:And i would also like to thank Glen for her help with this! > > Julie Hedlund:Yes thank you very much Glen! > > Pitinan Kooarmornpatana:thanks > > Jim Galvin:thanks bye! > > Julie Hedlund:Thank you everyone! > > WANAWIT Ahkuputra:thanks chris > > Chris Dillon:Thank you! > > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Glen at icann.org Thu Feb 6 22:08:32 2014 From: Glen at icann.org (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Glen_de_Saint_G=E9ry?=) Date: Thu, 6 Feb 2014 14:08:32 -0800 Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] Attendance, Presentation & MP3: Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information PDP WG meeting - 6 February 2014 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Dear Rudi, Apologies, We will resend the attendance noting your apologies. Thank you. Kind regards, Glen De : Rudi Vansnick [mailto:rudi.vansnick at isoc.be] Envoy? : jeudi 6 f?vrier 2014 22:38 ? : Glen de Saint G?ry Cc : gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org Objet : Re: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] Attendance, Presentation & MP3: Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information PDP WG meeting - 6 February 2014 Dear Glen, Dear all, I have to mention I informed Chris Dillon about my unavailability due to hospital visit. Please take note of my apologies. Kind regards, Rudi Vansnick NPOC chair Policy Committee NPOC treasurer rudi.vansnick at npoc.org Tel : +32 (0)9 329 39 16 Mobile : +32 (0)475 28 16 32 www.npoc.org Op 6-feb.-2014, om 19:02 heeft Glen de Saint G?ry > het volgende geschreven: Dear All, Please find the MP3 recording for the Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information PDP Charter Drafting Team call held on Thursday 6 February at 14:00 UTC at: http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-transliteration-contact-20140206-en.mp3 On page: http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar#feb Steve Sheng's presentation may be viewed directly http://gnso.icann.org/en/correspondence/presentation-feasibility-study-06feb14-en.pdf on page http://gnso.icann.org/en/council/correspondence The recordings and transcriptions of the calls are posted on the GNSO Master Calendar page: http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/ Attendees: Chris Dillon - NCSG Patrick Lenihan- NCUC Jim Galvin - SSAC Marc Blanchet - No SOI Justine Chew - At-Large Pitinan Koarmornpatna - GAC Patrick Lenihan - NCUC Ching Chiao - RySg Jennifer Chung - RySG Ahkuputra Wanawit - GAC Wolf Knoben - ISPCP Simon Perreault - No SOI Wolf-Ulrich Knoben - ISPCP Mae Suchayapim Siriwat - GAC Apologies: Ephriam Percy Kenyanito ICANN staff: Julie Hedlund Lars Hoffman Margie Milam Steve Sheng Glen de Saint Gery Nathalie Peregrine ** Please let me know if your name has been left off the list ** Wiki page: http://tinyurl.com/mpwxstx Thank you. Kind regards, Glen Glen de Saint G?ry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat at gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org Adobe Chat Transcript for Thursday 6 February 2014: Lars Hoffmann:Welcome to the Translation and Transliteration PDP WG on 6 February 2013 Ching Chiao (DotAsia):Ching Chiao :-) Ching Chiao (DotAsia):I am only on Adobe Ching Chiao (DotAsia):Glen please also note my participation, thanks! Ching Chiao (DotAsia):@Margie -- does EWG have the chance to cover other three recommendations from the IRD-WG report (especially access to WHOIS, both web and port 43, for IDN TLDs ? Ching Chiao (DotAsia):sure thanks for the response Peter Green:An announcement from ICANN Peter Green:http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-2-05feb14-en.htm Justine Chew:@Steve, do you have some timelines for the other tasks you've listed in your email? Steve Sheng:Thanks Justine, my estimate would be before London meeting. Ching Chiao (DotAsia):sorry have to cut off for another meeting. will listen to recording. tks chris and everyone Julie Hedlund:Thank you very much for your participation Ching Julie Hedlund:@Chris: This is the definition in the IRD-WG report: "Transliteration: The process of representing the characters of an alphabetical or syllabic system of writing by the characters of a conversion alphabet. " Marc Blanchet:I would suggest to use "transformation" if people want to cover all kind of transformations (transliteration, translation, romanization,...). We are currently using "transformation" in the study when want to talk about any kind. Julie Hedlund:@Chris: This is the definition in the Final Issue Report: "Transliterationistheprocessofrepresentingthecharactersofanalphabeticalorsyllabicsystemofwritingbythecharactersofaconversionalphabet.Iftransliterationweredesired,thenthe"mustbepresent"scriptwouldbetheLatinscript.Iftranslationweredesired,thenthe"mustbepresent"languagewouldbeEnglish." Julie Hedlund:Sorry about the lack of format! Marc Blanchet:agree. depends on the need. Peter Green:agree too. Transformation covers all kinds of change Julie Hedlund:@Wolf-Ulrich: There is the definition for "translation" in the Final Issue Report, "Translation is the process of conveying the meaning of some passage of text in one language, so that it can be expressed equivalently in another language.. Steve Sheng:Thanks Chris, this is good feedback, perhaps in the survey we ought to consider the definitions first as well. Julie Hedlund:@Steve: you might want to consider including definitions at the start of the survey, as in a taxonomy. Steve Sheng:yes Marc Blanchet:definitions as pointers. We don't want to overload the survey itself. People have lvery short attention time to surveys. Lars Hoffmann:And i would also like to thank Glen for her help with this! Julie Hedlund:Yes thank you very much Glen! Pitinan Kooarmornpatana:thanks Jim Galvin:thanks bye! Julie Hedlund:Thank you everyone! WANAWIT Ahkuputra:thanks chris Chris Dillon:Thank you! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Glen at icann.org Thu Feb 6 22:20:05 2014 From: Glen at icann.org (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Glen_de_Saint_G=E9ry?=) Date: Thu, 6 Feb 2014 14:20:05 -0800 Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] Corrected Attendance, Presentation & MP3: Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information PDP WG meeting - 6 February 2014 Message-ID: Dear All, The apologies of Rudi Vansnick and Petter Rindforth were omitted on the list and have now been added. Please find the MP3 recording for the Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information PDP Charter Drafting Team call held on Thursday 6 February at 14:00 UTC at: http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-transliteration-contact-20140206-en.mp3 On page: http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar#feb Steve Sheng's presentation may be viewed directly http://gnso.icann.org/en/correspondence/presentation-feasibility-study-06feb14-en.pdf on page http://gnso.icann.org/en/council/correspondence The recordings and transcriptions of the calls are posted on the GNSO Master Calendar page: http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/ Attendees: Chris Dillon - NCSG Patrick Lenihan- NCUC Jim Galvin - SSAC Marc Blanchet - No SOI Justine Chew - At-Large Pitinan Koarmornpatna - GAC Patrick Lenihan - NCUC Ching Chiao - RySg Jennifer Chung - RySG Ahkuputra Wanawit - GAC Wolf Knoben - ISPCP Simon Perreault - No SOI Wolf-Ulrich Knoben - ISPCP Mae Suchayapim Siriwat - GAC Apologies: Ephriam Percy Kenyanito Rudi Vansnick Petter Rindforth ICANN staff: Julie Hedlund Lars Hoffman Margie Milam Steve Sheng Glen de Saint Gery Nathalie Peregrine ** Please let me know if your name has been left off the list ** Wiki page: http://tinyurl.com/mpwxstx Thank you. Kind regards, Glen Glen de Saint G?ry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat at gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org Adobe Chat Transcript for Thursday 6 February 2014: Lars Hoffmann:Welcome to the Translation and Transliteration PDP WG on 6 February 2013 Ching Chiao (DotAsia):Ching Chiao :-) Ching Chiao (DotAsia):I am only on Adobe Ching Chiao (DotAsia):Glen please also note my participation, thanks! Ching Chiao (DotAsia):@Margie -- does EWG have the chance to cover other three recommendations from the IRD-WG report (especially access to WHOIS, both web and port 43, for IDN TLDs ? Ching Chiao (DotAsia):sure thanks for the response Peter Green:An announcement from ICANN Peter Green:http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-2-05feb14-en.htm Justine Chew:@Steve, do you have some timelines for the other tasks you've listed in your email? Steve Sheng:Thanks Justine, my estimate would be before London meeting. Ching Chiao (DotAsia):sorry have to cut off for another meeting. will listen to recording. tks chris and everyone Julie Hedlund:Thank you very much for your participation Ching Julie Hedlund:@Chris: This is the definition in the IRD-WG report: "Transliteration: The process of representing the characters of an alphabetical or syllabic system of writing by the characters of a conversion alphabet. " Marc Blanchet:I would suggest to use "transformation" if people want to cover all kind of transformations (transliteration, translation, romanization,...). We are currently using "transformation" in the study when want to talk about any kind. Julie Hedlund:@Chris: This is the definition in the Final Issue Report: "Transliterationistheprocessofrepresentingthecharactersofanalphabeticalorsyllabicsystemofwritingbythecharactersofaconversionalphabet.Iftransliterationweredesired,thenthe"mustbepresent"scriptwouldbetheLatinscript.Iftranslationweredesired,thenthe"mustbepresent"languagewouldbeEnglish." Julie Hedlund:Sorry about the lack of format! Marc Blanchet:agree. depends on the need. Peter Green:agree too. Transformation covers all kinds of change Julie Hedlund:@Wolf-Ulrich: There is the definition for "translation" in the Final Issue Report, "Translation is the process of conveying the meaning of some passage of text in one language, so that it can be expressed equivalently in another language.. Steve Sheng:Thanks Chris, this is good feedback, perhaps in the survey we ought to consider the definitions first as well. Julie Hedlund:@Steve: you might want to consider including definitions at the start of the survey, as in a taxonomy. Steve Sheng:yes Marc Blanchet:definitions as pointers. We don't want to overload the survey itself. People have lvery short attention time to surveys. Lars Hoffmann:And i would also like to thank Glen for her help with this! Julie Hedlund:Yes thank you very much Glen! Pitinan Kooarmornpatana:thanks Jim Galvin:thanks bye! Julie Hedlund:Thank you everyone! WANAWIT Ahkuputra:thanks chris Chris Dillon:Thank you! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Glen at icann.org Fri Feb 7 12:29:02 2014 From: Glen at icann.org (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Glen_de_Saint_G=E9ry?=) Date: Fri, 7 Feb 2014 04:29:02 -0800 Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] Corrected Attendance, Presentation & MP3: Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information PDP WG meeting - 6 February 2014 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Dear All, The apologies of Sarmad Hussain and Amr Elsadr were omitted on the list and have now been added. Please find the MP3 recording for the Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information PDP Charter Drafting Team call held on Thursday 6 February at 14:00 UTC at: http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-transliteration-contact-20140206-en.mp3 On page: http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar#feb Steve Sheng's presentation may be viewed directly http://gnso.icann.org/en/correspondence/presentation-feasibility-study-06feb14-en.pdf on page http://gnso.icann.org/en/council/correspondence The recordings and transcriptions of the calls are posted on the GNSO Master Calendar page: http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/ Attendees: Chris Dillon - NCSG Patrick Lenihan- NCUC Jim Galvin - SSAC Marc Blanchet - No SOI Justine Chew - At-Large Pitinan Koarmornpatna - GAC Patrick Lenihan - NCUC Ching Chiao - RySg Jennifer Chung - RySG Ahkuputra Wanawit - GAC Wolf Knoben - ISPCP Simon Perreault - No SOI Wolf-Ulrich Knoben - ISPCP Mae Suchayapim Siriwat - GAC Apologies: Ephriam Percy Kenyanito Rudi Vansnick Petter Rindforth Amr Elsadr Sarmad Hussain ICANN staff: Julie Hedlund Lars Hoffman Margie Milam Steve Sheng Glen de Saint Gery Nathalie Peregrine ** Please let me know if your name has been left off the list ** Wiki page: http://tinyurl.com/mpwxstx Thank you. Kind regards, Glen Glen de Saint G?ry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat at gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org Adobe Chat Transcript for Thursday 6 February 2014: Lars Hoffmann:Welcome to the Translation and Transliteration PDP WG on 6 February 2013 Ching Chiao (DotAsia):Ching Chiao :-) Ching Chiao (DotAsia):I am only on Adobe Ching Chiao (DotAsia):Glen please also note my participation, thanks! Ching Chiao (DotAsia):@Margie -- does EWG have the chance to cover other three recommendations from the IRD-WG report (especially access to WHOIS, both web and port 43, for IDN TLDs ? Ching Chiao (DotAsia):sure thanks for the response Peter Green:An announcement from ICANN Peter Green:http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-2-05feb14-en.htm Justine Chew:@Steve, do you have some timelines for the other tasks you've listed in your email? Steve Sheng:Thanks Justine, my estimate would be before London meeting. Ching Chiao (DotAsia):sorry have to cut off for another meeting. will listen to recording. tks chris and everyone Julie Hedlund:Thank you very much for your participation Ching Julie Hedlund:@Chris: This is the definition in the IRD-WG report: "Transliteration: The process of representing the characters of an alphabetical or syllabic system of writing by the characters of a conversion alphabet. " Marc Blanchet:I would suggest to use "transformation" if people want to cover all kind of transformations (transliteration, translation, romanization,...). We are currently using "transformation" in the study when want to talk about any kind. Julie Hedlund:@Chris: This is the definition in the Final Issue Report: "Transliterationistheprocessofrepresentingthecharactersofanalphabeticalorsyllabicsystemofwritingbythecharactersofaconversionalphabet.Iftransliterationweredesired,thenthe"mustbepresent"scriptwouldbetheLatinscript.Iftranslationweredesired,thenthe"mustbepresent"languagewouldbeEnglish." Julie Hedlund:Sorry about the lack of format! Marc Blanchet:agree. depends on the need. Peter Green:agree too. Transformation covers all kinds of change Julie Hedlund:@Wolf-Ulrich: There is the definition for "translation" in the Final Issue Report, "Translation is the process of conveying the meaning of some passage of text in one language, so that it can be expressed equivalently in another language.. Steve Sheng:Thanks Chris, this is good feedback, perhaps in the survey we ought to consider the definitions first as well. Julie Hedlund:@Steve: you might want to consider including definitions at the start of the survey, as in a taxonomy. Steve Sheng:yes Marc Blanchet:definitions as pointers. We don't want to overload the survey itself. People have lvery short attention time to surveys. Lars Hoffmann:And i would also like to thank Glen for her help with this! Julie Hedlund:Yes thank you very much Glen! Pitinan Kooarmornpatana:thanks Jim Galvin:thanks bye! Julie Hedlund:Thank you everyone! WANAWIT Ahkuputra:thanks chris Chris Dillon:Thank you! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From c.dillon at ucl.ac.uk Mon Feb 10 10:23:27 2014 From: c.dillon at ucl.ac.uk (Dillon, Chris) Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2014 10:23:27 +0000 Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] RE: Actions: PDP WG on Translation/Transliteration of Contact Info In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5f96336b020e4159a554981c8db10539@DB3PR01MB234.eurprd01.prod.exchangelabs.com> Dear colleagues, I have added two pages under 4. Who are the stakeholders?; who is affected? and what do they want (linking back to What)? https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=44960119 1. The first is a simple list of possible stakeholders. Is anyone aware of a better one we could link to and discuss? 2. The other one is a list of groups and individuals to whom we have sent publicity e-mails. Regards, Chris. -- Research Associate in Linguistic Computing, Centre for Digital Humanities, UCL, Gower St, London WC1E 6BT Tel +44 20 7679 1599 (int 31599) ucl.ac.uk/dis/people/chrisdillon From: owner-gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org [mailto:owner-gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org] On Behalf Of Julie Hedlund Sent: 06 February 2014 18:44 To: gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] Actions: PDP WG on Translation/Transliteration of Contact Info Dear PDP WG members, Please see below the actions from our meeting on 06 February. These also are posted to the wiki page at:https://community.icann.org/display/tatcipdp/06+February+2014. Actions: 1. Ching Chao will convey to the Council the PDP WG's request to get an agenda item on the Council meeting on 27 February so that the WG can bring to the Council its request for input. 2. Proposed Questions: Ask WG members to continue to suggest refinements on the list and the wiki. Question 1 -- ADD: What is the definition of translation and transliteration? Questions 3 & 4: Consider whether there are related questions or links to existing information. 1. What is contact information (review and expand on the taxonomies)? 2. Why are we doing this?; is this particular feature necessary? 3. Who gets access to what? 4. Who are the stakeholders?; who is affected? and what do they want (linking back to What)? 5. How much would a particular feature cost and how to weigh the costs versus the benefits? 6. When would policy come into effect? 7. What should be mandatory? Best regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From c.dillon at ucl.ac.uk Mon Feb 10 10:27:38 2014 From: c.dillon at ucl.ac.uk (Dillon, Chris) Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2014 10:27:38 +0000 Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] Definitions of translation and transliteration Message-ID: <658f1ac729444c91aec1cd38e0b9d2b4@DB3PR01MB234.eurprd01.prod.exchangelabs.com> Dear colleagues, So far, we are using the following definitions of translation and transliteration: Translation: The process of conveying the meaning of some passage of text in one language, so that it can be expressed equivalently in another language. Transliteration: The process of representing the characters of an alphabetical or syllabic system of writing by the characters of a conversion alphabet. Thoughts about translation As meaning is involved, it is possible to have more than one correct English translation of the same foreign language text. For example, one version may be literal, another less loyal but better English. Does anybody have a good example of this phenomenon? As more than one correct translation is possible, translation is not normally a reversible process. An exception would be when a controlled vocabulary is used. Such a vocabulary may be useful for contact information. For example, it may be possible always to translate the Japanese word ?? /biru/ as "building". Even in closely related languages, controlled vocabularies may produce nonsense. For example, German erst(e) is usually 'first' and Hilfe is usually 'help'. However, erste Hilfe is 'first aid', NOT 'first help'. Thoughts about transliteration The key word here is the word "process". Transliteration should be systematic. Ideally anyone transliterating should produce the same result. Typically it follows an ISO standard or government legislation. This may then be simplified in some way. For example, the Chinese example in https://community.icann.org/display/tatcipdp/Chinese+Addresses has the tone marks, that according to the Chinese transliteration rules should be there, removed. Transliteration does not mean: Representations where features from several systems mixed together, for example, Itou or Itoh for Japanese ?? or ??. Transliteration may be reversible in the case of alphabetic writing systems etc., as long as no letter in either script is represented by more than one letter in the other script. Thai, for example, is probably not reversible as it frequently represents the same sound with different letters depending on the tone of the syllable. See, for example, the high and low letters kho here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thai_alphabet#Alphabetic Regards, Chris. -- Research Associate in Linguistic Computing, Centre for Digital Humanities, UCL, Gower St, London WC1E 6BT Tel +44 20 7679 1599 (int 31599) ucl.ac.uk/dis/people/chrisdillon From: owner-gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org [mailto:owner-gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org] On Behalf Of Julie Hedlund Sent: 06 February 2014 18:44 To: gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] Actions: PDP WG on Translation/Transliteration of Contact Info Dear PDP WG members, Please see below the actions from our meeting on 06 February. These also are posted to the wiki page at:https://community.icann.org/display/tatcipdp/06+February+2014. Actions: 1. Ching Chao will convey to the Council the PDP WG's request to get an agenda item on the Council meeting on 27 February so that the WG can bring to the Council its request for input. 2. Proposed Questions: Ask WG members to continue to suggest refinements on the list and the wiki. Question 1 -- ADD: What is the definition of translation and transliteration? Questions 3 & 4: Consider whether there are related questions or links to existing information. 1. What is contact information (review and expand on the taxonomies)? 2. Why are we doing this?; is this particular feature necessary? 3. Who gets access to what? 4. Who are the stakeholders?; who is affected? and what do they want (linking back to What)? 5. How much would a particular feature cost and how to weigh the costs versus the benefits? 6. When would policy come into effect? 7. What should be mandatory? Best regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Glen at icann.org Mon Feb 10 16:52:00 2014 From: Glen at icann.org (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Glen_de_Saint_G=E9ry?=) Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2014 08:52:00 -0800 Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] TR: Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information Charter Questions In-Reply-To: <1E27BAA0E53D8A44B535BF7C119A9995596DD832@S-DC-ESTC02-J.net1.cec.eu.int> References: <1E27BAA0E53D8A44B535BF7C119A9995596DD832@S-DC-ESTC02-J.net1.cec.eu.int> Message-ID: FYI De : Anne.Van-Roy at ec.europa.eu [mailto:Anne.Van-Roy at ec.europa.eu] De la part de Linda.Corugedo-Steneberg at ec.europa.eu Envoy? : lundi 10 f?vrier 2014 17:25 ? : Glen de Saint G?ry; gnso-secs at icann.org Cc : CNECT-D at ec.europa.eu; Lars-Erik.Forsberg at ec.europa.eu; Eddy.Hartog at ec.europa.eu; Ardiel.CABRERA at ec.europa.eu; Daniel.SPOIALA at ec.europa.eu; Marta.SANAGUSTIN at ec.europa.eu; Linda.Corugedo-Steneberg at ec.europa.eu; Camino.MANJON at ec.europa.eu Objet : Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information Charter Questions Dear Mr de Saint G?ry, Thank you for your email concerning Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information. In the European Union we already have a certain level of expertise on the topic since the Top Level Domain "dot.eu" is managed the Registry provider EURid in all available languages of the EU. In the EU there are a number of Member States which do use characters other than Latin scripts (i.e.: Cyrillic, Greek). Is for that reason that EURid supports the 24 EU official languages and the dot.eu WHOIS contains Registrant but also Registrar data in Greek and in Bulgarian and in any other language. In line with our strive for multilingualism and equal access online, the specific EU Regulation pertaining to the "dot.eu" TLD foresees that EURid performs the registration of domain names in all languages of the European Union. Therefore we are of the view that any Registrant should be able to express himself in his own native language anywhere in the Internet. Registrants should be given the opportunity to submit data to the Registrar in his own language when registering a domain name. >From our experience, there might be extra costs for some of the involved parties (like the Registry, the Registrars and/or ICANN in the GNSO environment), but that should be budgeted in the ultimate interest of the end users. As per your questions, please find our positive/negative feedback below: ? Whether it is desirable to translate contact information to a single common language or transliterate contact information to a single common script // while Registrant information should be gathered in all existing languages and scripts, a translation to a single common language would be beneficial and ensure an homogeneous WHOIS resource. ? What exactly the benefits to the community are of translating and/or transliterating contact information, especially in light of the costs that may be connected to translation and/or transliteration? // it facilitates registration for those Registrants who do not speak a common language or use a common script, while at the same time it makes easier the consultation of such data by parties (like Law Enforcement) who require a common language or who may face difficulties while dealing with non-Latin scripts. Registrants would have full rights when it comes to respect for multilingualism and Registrant data can be consulted/searched in a more homogeneous manner thanks to translation to a common language or script. ? Should translation and/or transliteration of contact information be mandatory for all gTLDs? Yes ? Should translation and/or transliteration of contact information be mandatory for all registrants or only those based in certain countries and/or using specific non-ASCII scripts? For all ? What impact will translation/transliteration of contact information have on the WHOIS validation as set out under the 2013 Registrar Accreditation Agreement? Validation will be more cumbersome provided there is no translation or transliteration ? When should any new policy relating to translation and transliteration of contact information come into effect? As soon as possible, provided that it is reasonable. ? Do you have suggestions concerning the basic principles to guide the cost burden discussion, such as the free of charge provision of the information, demand-oriented cost etc.? In particular, the PDP WG is tasked with determining who should decide who should bear the burden translating contact information to a single common language or transliterating contact information to a single common script. // Registries should bear the cost of translation and transliteration of Registrar data, and Registrars should bear the cost of translation and transliteration of registrant data. As indicated above, this is the cost of making business. The additional cost should be budgeted in the interest of end users. The transliteration and translation should not have, in any case, an effect on the final price that Registrants bear. We hope you deem this feedback useful. Best regards Linda CORUGEDO STENEBERG DIRECTOR [cid:image001.gif at 01CF267B.1C1F4D00] European Commission Communications networks, Content and Technologies Directorate-General, DG CONNECT Cooperation, Directorate D BU 25 06/24 B-1049 Brussels/Belgium +32 22996383 Mobile+32-498996383 linda.corugedo-steneberg at ec.europa.eu From: Glen de Saint G?ry [mailto:Glen at icann.org] Sent: Tuesday, February 04, 2014 11:40 PM To: CNECT D Cc: gnso-secs at icann.org; Lars Hoffmann Subject: Input Request:Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information Charter Questions Dear GAC representative, dear Linda As you may be aware, the GNSO Council recently initiated a Policy Development Process (PDP) on the Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information; the relevant Issue Report can be found here. A more detailed background is available online on the Working Group's Wiki where you can also consult the Charter. As part of its efforts to obtain broad input from the ICANN Community at an early stage and we have written to Ms Heather Dryden, Chair of the GAC, already to solicit feedback from the GAC where possible. However, as the matter of translating and/or transliteration of Contact information will be of special significance for countries that do not use Latin Scripts, we thought it useful to contact individual GAC representatives. Please note that we do not seek an official position on this matter but rather would welcome any thoughts and/or experiences you might have and what the best practice might be or ought to be in your country on this matter. An informal response to any of the questions below or any other thoughts you might have on the issue of translation and transliteration of Contact Information would be very much appreciated. Please send these to the GNSO Secretariat (gnso.secretariat at gnso.icann.org) who will forward these to the Working Group; ideally by Tuesday 11 March 2014. Finally, our Working Group is planning to gather for a face-to-face meeting during the forthcoming ICANN Meeting in Singapore. We would be delighted if you could join our discussions should you be in Singapore at the time. We will renew this invitation closer to the time when we have finalized our meeting time and agenda. Many thanks and best wishes, Chris Dillon (Co-Chair) Rudi Vansnick (Co-Chair) Input Request Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information Charter Questions Whether it is desirable to translate contact information to a single common language or transliterate contact information to a single common script. What exactly the benefits to the community are of translating and/or transliterating contact information, especially in light of the costs that may be connected to translation and/or transliteration? Should translation and/or transliteration of contact information be mandatory for all gTLDs? Should translation and/or transliteration of contact information be mandatory for all registrants or only those based in certain countries and/or using specific non-ASCII scripts? What impact will translation/transliteration of contact information have on the WHOIS validation as set out under the 2013 Registrar Accreditation Agreement? When should any new policy relating to translation and transliteration of contact information come into effect? Do you have suggestions concerning the basic principles to guide the cost burden discussion, such as the free of charge provision of the information, demand-oriented cost etc.? In particular, the PDP WG is tasked with determining who should decide who should bear the burden translating contact information to a single common language or transliterating contact information to a single common script. This question relates to the concern expressed by the Internationalized Registration Data Working Group (IRD-WG) in its report that there are costs associated with providing translation and transliteration of contact information. For example, if a policy development process (PDP) determined that the registrar must translate or transliterate contact information, this policy would place a cost burden on the registrar. Glen de Saint G?ry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat at gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.gif Type: image/gif Size: 3898 bytes Desc: image001.gif URL: From c.dillon at ucl.ac.uk Wed Feb 12 10:05:23 2014 From: c.dillon at ucl.ac.uk (Dillon, Chris) Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2014 10:05:23 +0000 Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] Linda Corugedo Steneberg's letter Message-ID: Dear colleagues, Please find some issues arising from Linda Corugedo Steneberg's letter for discussion in tomorrow's call. Background Linda Corugedo Steneberg is Director of the European Commission's Communications networks, Content and Technologies Directorate-General, DG CONNECT Cooperation, Directorate D. The EU manages .eu in all languages of the EU, including Greek and Bulgarian, including the registration of domain names. "Registrants should be given the opportunity to submit data to the Registrar in his own language when registering a domain name. >From our experience, there might be extra costs for some of the involved parties (like the Registry, the Registrars and/or ICANN in the GNSO environment), but that should be budgeted in the ultimate interest of the end users." It would be worth knowing exactly what those costs are for (transliteration or translation, which fields, verification etc.) and how substantial they are. There are also suggestions about who pays, i.e. "Registries should bear the cost of translation and transliteration of Registrar data, and Registrars should bear the cost of translation and transliteration of registrant data. As indicated above, this is the cost of making business. The additional cost should be budgeted in the interest of end users. The transliteration and translation should not have, in any case, an effect on the final price that Registrants bear." The last sentence may not necessarily be the case if the registrars and registries are for some reason not able to subsidise the increased costs foreign language work will cause. A homogeneous WHOIS (i.e. IRD) resource is quoted as a benefit of transliterating/translating. Using a common language facilitates registration when registrants do not share one. Consultation of data by law enforcement et al. requires a common language. These benefits should be added to our wiki as answers to some of the questions. "Registrants would have full rights when it comes to respect for multilingualism" would mean that registrars would need to be able to process applications in a wide range of languages, in this case it's the EU languages. It could be argued that this is a special case and that many registries would not need to process applications in such a wide range of languages. It may be useful to think through some scenarios, for example, involving applications for domain names in scripts applied for in countries where there is little experience with the script in question. "Validation will be more cumbersome provided there is no translation or transliteration" What is being validated? That the non-ASCII label is what it says it is, or that the transliteration/translation is correct? I welcome your responses to these issues and others you may find in the letter, either before or during tomorrow's call. Regards, Chris. -- Research Associate in Linguistic Computing, Centre for Digital Humanities, UCL, Gower St, London WC1E 6BT Tel +44 20 7679 1599 (int 31599) ucl.ac.uk/dis/people/chrisdillon De : Anne.Van-Roy at ec.europa.eu [mailto:Anne.Van-Roy at ec.europa.eu] De la part de Linda.Corugedo-Steneberg at ec.europa.eu Envoy? : lundi 10 f?vrier 2014 17:25 ? : Glen de Saint G?ry; gnso-secs at icann.org Cc : CNECT-D at ec.europa.eu; Lars-Erik.Forsberg at ec.europa.eu; Eddy.Hartog at ec.europa.eu; Ardiel.CABRERA at ec.europa.eu; Daniel.SPOIALA at ec.europa.eu; Marta.SANAGUSTIN at ec.europa.eu; Linda.Corugedo-Steneberg at ec.europa.eu; Camino.MANJON at ec.europa.eu Objet : Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information Charter Questions Dear Mr de Saint G?ry, Thank you for your email concerning Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information. In the European Union we already have a certain level of expertise on the topic since the Top Level Domain "dot.eu" is managed the Registry provider EURid in all available languages of the EU. In the EU there are a number of Member States which do use characters other than Latin scripts (i.e.: Cyrillic, Greek). Is for that reason that EURid supports the 24 EU official languages and the dot.eu WHOIS contains Registrant but also Registrar data in Greek and in Bulgarian and in any other language. In line with our strive for multilingualism and equal access online, the specific EU Regulation pertaining to the "dot.eu" TLD foresees that EURid performs the registration of domain names in all languages of the European Union. Therefore we are of the view that any Registrant should be able to express himself in his own native language anywhere in the Internet. Registrants should be given the opportunity to submit data to the Registrar in his own language when registering a domain name. >From our experience, there might be extra costs for some of the involved parties (like the Registry, the Registrars and/or ICANN in the GNSO environment), but that should be budgeted in the ultimate interest of the end users. As per your questions, please find our positive/negative feedback below: ? Whether it is desirable to translate contact information to a single common language or transliterate contact information to a single common script // while Registrant information should be gathered in all existing languages and scripts, a translation to a single common language would be beneficial and ensure an homogeneous WHOIS resource. ? What exactly the benefits to the community are of translating and/or transliterating contact information, especially in light of the costs that may be connected to translation and/or transliteration? // it facilitates registration for those Registrants who do not speak a common language or use a common script, while at the same time it makes easier the consultation of such data by parties (like Law Enforcement) who require a common language or who may face difficulties while dealing with non-Latin scripts. Registrants would have full rights when it comes to respect for multilingualism and Registrant data can be consulted/searched in a more homogeneous manner thanks to translation to a common language or script. ? Should translation and/or transliteration of contact information be mandatory for all gTLDs? Yes ? Should translation and/or transliteration of contact information be mandatory for all registrants or only those based in certain countries and/or using specific non-ASCII scripts? For all ? What impact will translation/transliteration of contact information have on the WHOIS validation as set out under the 2013 Registrar Accreditation Agreement? Validation will be more cumbersome provided there is no translation or transliteration ? When should any new policy relating to translation and transliteration of contact information come into effect? As soon as possible, provided that it is reasonable. ? Do you have suggestions concerning the basic principles to guide the cost burden discussion, such as the free of charge provision of the information, demand-oriented cost etc.? In particular, the PDP WG is tasked with determining who should decide who should bear the burden translating contact information to a single common language or transliterating contact information to a single common script. // Registries should bear the cost of translation and transliteration of Registrar data, and Registrars should bear the cost of translation and transliteration of registrant data. As indicated above, this is the cost of making business. The additional cost should be budgeted in the interest of end users. The transliteration and translation should not have, in any case, an effect on the final price that Registrants bear. We hope you deem this feedback useful. Best regards Linda CORUGEDO STENEBERG DIRECTOR [cid:image001.gif at 01CF27D9.F6E2D100] European Commission Communications networks, Content and Technologies Directorate-General, DG CONNECT Cooperation, Directorate D BU 25 06/24 B-1049 Brussels/Belgium +32 22996383 Mobile+32-498996383 linda.corugedo-steneberg at ec.europa.eu -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.gif Type: image/gif Size: 3898 bytes Desc: image001.gif URL: From c.dillon at ucl.ac.uk Thu Feb 13 09:38:07 2014 From: c.dillon at ucl.ac.uk (Dillon, Chris) Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2014 09:38:07 +0000 Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] [IDN-WG] CALL FOR COMMENTS: ALAC Statement on the Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information Working Group SO-AC Input Request Message-ID: <174f09b4751d4c94b700d746b7180b64@DB3PR01MB234.eurprd01.prod.exchangelabs.com> Dear colleagues, For your information, and with apologies for cross-posting. Regards, Chris. -- Research Associate in Linguistic Computing, Centre for Digital Humanities, UCL, Gower St, London WC1E 6BT Tel +44 20 7679 1599 (int 31599) ucl.ac.uk/dis/people/chrisdillon From: idn-wg-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:idn-wg-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of ICANN At-Large Staff Sent: 13 February 2014 01:36 To: Edmon Chung; Rinalia Abdul Rahim Cc: idn-wg at atlarge-lists.icann.org Subject: [IDN-WG] CALL FOR COMMENTS: ALAC Statement on the Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information Working Group SO-AC Input Request Dear Edmon and Rinalia, Please note that the At-Large Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information Working Group SO-AC Input Request Workspace has been created. Please note that this workspace will be used to gather the At-Large's comments on this Input Request Please submit any comments on the workspace using the comments function by 28 Feb 2014 23:59 UTC. Regards, Heidi Ullrich, Silvia Vivanco, Matt Ashtiani, Gisella Gruber, Nathalie Peregrine and Julia Charvolen ICANN Policy Staff in support of ALAC E-mail: staff at atlarge.icann.org> _______________________________________________ IDN-WG mailing list IDN-WG at atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/idn-wg IDN WG Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+IDN+Policy -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rudi.vansnick at isoc.be Thu Feb 13 10:19:04 2014 From: rudi.vansnick at isoc.be (Rudi Vansnick) Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2014 11:19:04 +0100 Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] [IDN-WG] CALL FOR COMMENTS: ALAC Statement on the Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information Working Group SO-AC Input Request In-Reply-To: <174f09b4751d4c94b700d746b7180b64@DB3PR01MB234.eurprd01.prod.exchangelabs.com> References: <174f09b4751d4c94b700d746b7180b64@DB3PR01MB234.eurprd01.prod.exchangelabs.com> Message-ID: <12CB058B-3DBE-4351-8DDD-7EC369E6E444@isoc.be> Dear Chris, Dear colleagues, Unfortunately I'm not yet recovered of the illness. 3 weeks now I?m suffering and my voice is still very weak. My doctor estimates I will have my voice back in about 2-3 days. There is progress and I feel already better. However, I have to sent my apologies for todays call. I?m preparing myself anyway for the next call so I will be fully operational for that one. Kind regards, Rudi Vansnick NPOC chair Policy Committee NPOC treasurer rudi.vansnick at npoc.org Tel : +32 (0)9 329 39 16 Mobile : +32 (0)475 28 16 32 www.npoc.org Op 13-feb.-2014, om 10:38 heeft Dillon, Chris het volgende geschreven: > Dear colleagues, > > For your information, and with apologies for cross-posting. > > Regards, > > Chris. > -- > Research Associate in Linguistic Computing, Centre for Digital Humanities, UCL, Gower St, London WC1E 6BT Tel +44 20 7679 1599 (int 31599) ucl.ac.uk/dis/people/chrisdillon > > From: idn-wg-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:idn-wg-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of ICANN At-Large Staff > Sent: 13 February 2014 01:36 > To: Edmon Chung; Rinalia Abdul Rahim > Cc: idn-wg at atlarge-lists.icann.org > Subject: [IDN-WG] CALL FOR COMMENTS: ALAC Statement on the Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information Working Group SO-AC Input Request > > Dear Edmon and Rinalia, > > Please note that the At-Large Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information Working Group SO-AC Input Request Workspace has been created. Please note that this workspace will be used to gather the At-Large's comments on this Input Request > > Please submit any comments on the workspace using the comments function by 28 Feb 2014 23:59 UTC. > > Regards, > > Heidi Ullrich, Silvia Vivanco, Matt Ashtiani, Gisella Gruber, Nathalie Peregrine and Julia Charvolen ICANN Policy Staff in support of ALAC > E-mail: staff at atlarge.icann.org > > _______________________________________________ > IDN-WG mailing list > IDN-WG at atlarge-lists.icann.org > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/idn-wg > > IDN WG Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+IDN+Policy > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From c.dillon at ucl.ac.uk Thu Feb 13 10:44:22 2014 From: c.dillon at ucl.ac.uk (Dillon, Chris) Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2014 10:44:22 +0000 Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] Wiki pages for correspondence and definitions Message-ID: <196674ebe5244463a69d318cb13a2449@DB3PR01MB234.eurprd01.prod.exchangelabs.com> Dear colleagues, I have created two new pages on the wiki this morning, so that we have a place for storing and discussing correspondence such as Linda Corugedo Steneberg's letter: https://community.icann.org/display/tatcipdp/List+of+correspondence+received and comments on definitions: https://community.icann.org/display/tatcipdp/Comments+on+what+is+contact+information Regards, Chris. -- Research Associate in Linguistic Computing, Centre for Digital Humanities, UCL, Gower St, London WC1E 6BT Tel +44 20 7679 1599 (int 31599) ucl.ac.uk/dis/people/chrisdillon -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Glen at icann.org Thu Feb 13 17:10:52 2014 From: Glen at icann.org (=?utf-8?B?R2xlbiBkZSBTYWludCBHw6lyeQ==?=) Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2014 09:10:52 -0800 Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] MP3 Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information PDP WG meeting - 13 February 2014 Message-ID: Dear All, Please find the MP3 recording for the Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information PDP Charter Drafting Team call held on Thursday 13 February at 14:00 UTC at: http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-transliteration-contact-20140213-en.mp3 On page: http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar#feb The recordings and transcriptions of the calls are posted on the GNSO Master Calendar page: http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/ Attendees: Chris Dillon - NCSG Patrick Lenihan- NCUC Amr Elsadr - NCUC Jim Galvin - SSAC Justine Chew ? At-Large Patrick Lenihan - NCUC Jennifer Chung - RySG Ahkuputra Wanawit ? GAC Mae Suchayapim Siriwat ? GAC Pitinan Koarmornpatna - GAC Wolf-Ulrich Knoben ? ISPCP Peter Green - NCUC Peter Dernbach ? IPC Petter Rindforth ? IPC Sarmad Hussain - SSAC Apologies: Ephriam Percy Kenyanito Rudi Vansnick ICANN staff: Lars Hoffman Glen de Saint Gery ** Please let me know if your name has been left off the list ** Wiki page: http://tinyurl.com/mpwxstx Thank you. Kind regards, Glen Glen de Saint G?ry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat at gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org Adobe Chat Transcript for Thursday 13 February 2014: Lars Hoffmann:Welcome to the Translation and Transliteration PDP WG on 13 February 2013 Peter Green:Hi Lars?we have come to 2014 Peter Dernbach:Hello All. Chris Dillon:Hello, Peter. Chris Dillon:Hello all Peter Green:Hi, Chris Pitinan Kooarmornpatana:Hi all Petter Rindforth:Sorry that I missed the last call. However, I will follow up later on this week with comments I have got from members of some IP organizations. Jim Galvin:A question that occurs to me is could we distinguish between registrar information and registrant information? Jim Galvin:A question benefits: Amr Elsadr:Apologies for being late. This time slot is proving somewhat problematic. Sarmad Hussain:Validation: Are we building the right product? Sarmad Hussain:Verification: Are we building the product right? Sarmad Hussain:from wikipedia Jim Galvin:@sarmad - yes that matches what SSAC did Jim Galvin:SAC058SSAC Report on Domain Name Registration Data Validation Amr Elsadr:On leaving out the question of available taxonomies: Any work produced by the EWG is not policy. It is an ad-hoc WG outside the PDP. If we are going to adopt their definitions, I recommend we (as a WG) consider them and agree to use them..., in the absense of any other desirable definitions. Just a thought. :) Jim Galvin:It is SAC058 that has the definition reference. What I realize now as I review the document SSAC did not actually try to state a Amr Elsadr:Apologies..., I have no audio today. Jim Galvin:...to state a definition. Instead we simply noted in a footnate that the terms are used interchangeable and that SSAC would use the term "validation." Amr Elsadr:I can hear, but can't speak. :) Amr Elsadr:The Arabic word ????? means cupboard in Egypt, but tyre in Lebanon. This is however only true for the spoken dialects, but not the official written form of Arabic. It is probably not relevant to this discussion, but I will try to see if there are any potential difficulties in translation relevant to translation of contact info. Amr Elsadr:@Petter: Yes..., and the ? in Norway. Amr Elsadr:? and ? as well. Petter Rindforth:Exactly Wolf Knoben:I'm sorry for having to leave for another meeting. Hear you next week. Thanks and good bye Amr Elsadr:@Chris: Yes, on the official Arabic..., I agree. Jim Galvin: Sorry I need to leave for another meeting. Thanks! Amr Elsadr:Thanks. Bye. Lars Hoffmann:thanks chris! Peter Dernbach:Thanks Chris and All. Justine Chew:Thanks Chris Jennifer Chung:Thank you Chris, thank you all, bye! Chris Dillon:Thank you all! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From julie.hedlund at icann.org Fri Feb 14 16:54:14 2014 From: julie.hedlund at icann.org (Julie Hedlund) Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2014 08:54:14 -0800 Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] Actions: PDP WG on Translation/Transliteration of Contact Info In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Dear Ching, I hope you don't mind, but I had an opportunity to see an early draft of the agenda for the meeting on the 27th that the GNSO Council Chairs were circulating. I asked them ? on your behalf ? to include an update and discussion from you on the PDP WG and specifically on the request for input from the SOs and ACs, including the GNSO. Best regards, Julie From: Ching Chiao Date: Thursday, February 6, 2014 10:42 PM To: Julie Hedlund Cc: "gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org" Subject: Re: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] Actions: PDP WG on Translation/Transliteration of Contact Info Hi Julie, everyone, Thanks for sending this reminder. I will help make sure that the WG has a timeslot for update and discussion in the next Council meeting on the 27th. Meanwhile for the 7 questions listed, I'd like to seek for further clarification -- how do these 7 questions relate to the two given recommendations we are trying to resolve (i.e. 1. what needs to be t & t and 2. cost / responsibility on whom) ? Thanks! Ching Chiao On Fri, Feb 7, 2014 at 2:43 AM, Julie Hedlund wrote: > Dear PDP WG members, > > Please see below the actions from our meeting on 06 February. These also are > posted to the wiki page > at:https://community.icann.org/display/tatcipdp/06+February+2014. > > Actions: > 1. Ching Chao will convey to the Council the PDP WG's request to get an > agenda item on the Council meeting on 27 February so that the WG can bring to > the Council its request for input. > > 2. Proposed Questions: Ask WG members to continue to suggest refinements on > the list and the wiki. Question 1 -- ADD: What is the definition of > translation and transliteration? Questions 3 & 4: Consider whether there are > related questions or links to existing information. >> 1. What is contact information (review and expand on the taxonomies)? >> >> 2. Why are we doing this?; is this particular feature necessary? >> >> 3. Who gets access to what? >> >> 4. Who are the stakeholders?; who is affected? and what do they want >> (linking back to What)? >> >> 5. How much would a particular feature cost and how to weigh the costs >> versus the benefits? >> >> 6. When would policy come into effect? >> >> 7. What should be mandatory? > > Best regards, > > Julie > > Julie Hedlund, Policy Director -- Ching Chiao Founder and CEO www.Brandma.co +886.918.211372 +86.135.20187032 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 5041 bytes Desc: not available URL: From julie.hedlund at icann.org Thu Feb 20 12:41:30 2014 From: julie.hedlund at icann.org (Julie Hedlund) Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2014 04:41:30 -0800 Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] Actions: PDP WG on Translation/Transliteration of Contact Info In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Dear Ching, The GNSO Council Chairs met this morning with staff to go over the agenda for next week's meeting. I conveyed your request to include one of the co-chairs and it was granted. Jonathan Robinson asks that the co-chair should join at half-past the hour (1130 UTC), which is the point at which the Council will take up this agenda item. Glen will forward the invite to the co-chairs and Rudi and Chris can decide which of them will attend. Best regards, Julie From: Ching Chiao Date: Wednesday, February 19, 2014 9:49 AM To: Julie Hedlund Cc: "gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org" Subject: Re: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] Actions: PDP WG on Translation/Transliteration of Contact Info Hi Julie, Colleagues, We should invite at least one of the co-chairs to provide brief update in the next Council call on the 27th. Please help confirm and I will let Jonathan and Glen know their participation in advance. Thanks very much. Ching On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 11:12 AM, Ching Chiao wrote: > Thanks a lot Julie for your kind assistance. -- Ching > > > On Sat, Feb 15, 2014 at 12:54 AM, Julie Hedlund > wrote: >> Dear Ching, >> >> I hope you don't mind, but I had an opportunity to see an early draft of the >> agenda for the meeting on the 27th that the GNSO Council Chairs were >> circulating. I asked them ? on your behalf ? to include an update and >> discussion from you on the PDP WG and specifically on the request for input >> from the SOs and ACs, including the GNSO. >> >> Best regards, >> >> Julie >> >> From: Ching Chiao >> Date: Thursday, February 6, 2014 10:42 PM >> To: Julie Hedlund >> Cc: "gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org" >> Subject: Re: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] Actions: PDP WG on >> Translation/Transliteration of Contact Info >> >> Hi Julie, everyone, >> >> Thanks for sending this reminder. I will help make sure that the WG has a >> timeslot for update and discussion in the next Council meeting on the 27th. >> >> Meanwhile for the 7 questions listed, I'd like to seek for further >> clarification -- how do these 7 questions relate to the two given >> recommendations we are trying to resolve (i.e. 1. what needs to be t & t and >> 2. cost / responsibility on whom) ? >> >> Thanks! >> >> Ching Chiao >> >> >> >> On Fri, Feb 7, 2014 at 2:43 AM, Julie Hedlund >> wrote: >>> Dear PDP WG members, >>> >>> Please see below the actions from our meeting on 06 February. These also >>> are posted to the wiki page >>> at:https://community.icann.org/display/tatcipdp/06+February+2014. >>> >>> Actions: >>> 1. Ching Chao will convey to the Council the PDP WG's request to get an >>> agenda item on the Council meeting on 27 February so that the WG can bring >>> to the Council its request for input. >>> >>> 2. Proposed Questions: Ask WG members to continue to suggest refinements on >>> the list and the wiki. Question 1 -- ADD: What is the definition of >>> translation and transliteration? Questions 3 & 4: Consider whether there are >>> related questions or links to existing information. >>>> 1. What is contact information (review and expand on the taxonomies)? >>>> >>>> 2. Why are we doing this?; is this particular feature necessary? >>>> >>>> 3. Who gets access to what? >>>> >>>> 4. Who are the stakeholders?; who is affected? and what do they want >>>> (linking back to What)? >>>> >>>> 5. How much would a particular feature cost and how to weigh the costs >>>> versus the benefits? >>>> >>>> 6. When would policy come into effect? >>>> >>>> 7. What should be mandatory? >>> >>> Best regards, >>> >>> Julie >>> >>> Julie Hedlund, Policy Director >> >> >> >> -- >> Ching Chiao >> Founder and CEO >> www.Brandma.co >> +886.918.211372 >> +86.135.20187032 >> >> >> >> > > > > -- > Ching Chiao > Founder and CEO > www.Brandma.co > +886.918.211372 > +86.135.20187032 > > > > -- Ching Chiao Founder and CEO www.Brandma.co +886.918.211372 +86.135.20187032 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 5041 bytes Desc: not available URL: From wolf-ulrich.knoben at t-online.de Thu Feb 20 13:24:11 2014 From: wolf-ulrich.knoben at t-online.de (WUKnoben) Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2014 14:24:11 +0100 Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] PDP WG on Translation/Transliteration of Contact Info In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: My apologies for not being able to attend the call today due to another commitment which came in on short term Best regards Wolf-Ulrich -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From nathalie.peregrine at icann.org Thu Feb 20 13:49:45 2014 From: nathalie.peregrine at icann.org (Nathalie Peregrine) Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2014 05:49:45 -0800 Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] PDP WG on Translation/Transliteration of Contact Info In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Dear Wolf-Ulrich, Thank you for this, your apology has been noted. Kind regards Nathalie From: owner-gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org [mailto:owner-gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org] On Behalf Of WUKnoben Sent: Thursday, February 20, 2014 2:24 PM To: gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] PDP WG on Translation/Transliteration of Contact Info My apologies for not being able to attend the call today due to another commitment which came in on short term Best regards Wolf-Ulrich -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From julie.hedlund at icann.org Thu Feb 20 14:38:27 2014 From: julie.hedlund at icann.org (Julie Hedlund) Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2014 06:38:27 -0800 Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] Purpose of the Study and the Survey Message-ID: Dear PDP WG members, As a reminder please see the information below provided by Steve Sheng several weeks ago. I think they may have completed the survey since they requested feedback by 12 February. I will check with Steve. Best regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director ----------- Forwarded from Steve Sheng on 2/3/14 ------------------ > 5. Update from Steve Sheng on Study Group to Evaluate Available Solutions for > the Submission and Display of Internationalized Contact Data. Thanks Julie and Chris, the study team (copied here) is happy to be on the call to provide an update and answer questions. Please find below is a written summary and a request for feedback on a registrar and registry survey. The purpose of the study is to: 1. Document the submission and display practices of internationalized registration data at a representative set of gTLD and ccTLD registries and registrars. 2. Investigate and document how other e-merchants or web sites manage internationalized contact data. 3. Consider and assess the cost and functionality of commercial, open source, or other known but as yet not widely implemented solutions for 1) transliterating internationalized contact information to US-ASCII, 2) translating internationalized contact information to English, 3) transcribing internationalized contact information to US-ASCII, or 4) a mixture of translation, transliteration and transcription. 4. Consider and assess the accuracy implications for transliteration and translation of the internationalized contact data 5. Based on practices documented in 1 and understanding the issues raised in 3 and 4 and best practices by other e-merchants in 2, summarize some common best practices registry/registrar could do to minimize these variations, if translation and/or transliteration is deemed necessary. The study team is currently on the first task, and has prepared a registry and registrar survey to complete. Since this group is closely working in this area, we appreciate very much if you have any feedback on these survey questions. Such feedback will help us to make sure we ask the right questions. Your feedback by 12 February is much appreciated. More information about the study can be found here: https://community.icann.org/display/whoisird/Study+to+Evaluate+Available+Sol utions+for+the+Submission+and+Display+of+Internationalized+Contact+Data Kind regards, Steve -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: survey-registry.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 76768 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: survey-registrar.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 59992 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 5041 bytes Desc: not available URL: From julie.hedlund at icann.org Thu Feb 20 14:41:31 2014 From: julie.hedlund at icann.org (Julie Hedlund) Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2014 06:41:31 -0800 Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] Purpose of the Study and the Survey Message-ID: Dear PDP WG members, More on this point, Sarmad has confirmed in today's meeting that the survey has gone out but that input is still welcome. Best regards, Julie From: Julie Hedlund Date: Thursday, February 20, 2014 9:38 AM To: "gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org" Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] Purpose of the Study and the Survey Dear PDP WG members, As a reminder please see the information below provided by Steve Sheng several weeks ago. I think they may have completed the survey since they requested feedback by 12 February. I will check with Steve. Best regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director ----------- Forwarded from Steve Sheng on 2/3/14 ------------------ > 5. Update from Steve Sheng on Study Group to Evaluate Available Solutions for > the Submission and Display of Internationalized Contact Data. Thanks Julie and Chris, the study team (copied here) is happy to be on the call to provide an update and answer questions. Please find below is a written summary and a request for feedback on a registrar and registry survey. The purpose of the study is to: 1. Document the submission and display practices of internationalized registration data at a representative set of gTLD and ccTLD registries and registrars. 2. Investigate and document how other e-merchants or web sites manage internationalized contact data. 3. Consider and assess the cost and functionality of commercial, open source, or other known but as yet not widely implemented solutions for 1) transliterating internationalized contact information to US-ASCII, 2) translating internationalized contact information to English, 3) transcribing internationalized contact information to US-ASCII, or 4) a mixture of translation, transliteration and transcription. 4. Consider and assess the accuracy implications for transliteration and translation of the internationalized contact data 5. Based on practices documented in 1 and understanding the issues raised in 3 and 4 and best practices by other e-merchants in 2, summarize some common best practices registry/registrar could do to minimize these variations, if translation and/or transliteration is deemed necessary. The study team is currently on the first task, and has prepared a registry and registrar survey to complete. Since this group is closely working in this area, we appreciate very much if you have any feedback on these survey questions. Such feedback will help us to make sure we ask the right questions. Your feedback by 12 February is much appreciated. More information about the study can be found here: https://community.icann.org/display/whoisird/Study+to+Evaluate+Available+Sol utions+for+the+Submission+and+Display+of+Internationalized+Contact+Data Kind regards, Steve -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 5041 bytes Desc: not available URL: From sarmad.hussain at kics.edu.pk Thu Feb 20 16:52:19 2014 From: sarmad.hussain at kics.edu.pk (Sarmad Hussain) Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2014 21:52:19 +0500 Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] Purpose of the Study and the Survey In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <530632bb.4205c20a.2162.633d@mx.google.com> Dear All, A few action items on my side from today's call: 1. Further to the emails by Julie below, please find attached latest versions of the surveys for registrars and registries. Your feedback is very welcome. For the registrar survey, the list of organizations for circulation is still being finalized, so your input on this survey may still be incorporated if we get it soon. 2. Regarding when the interim information will be available from the Transformation study, we have requested Julie and Lars to fit in an update from the study group to this IRD PDP WG in Singapore, so that we can share with you what we already have sooner than April. Regards, Sarmad From: owner-gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org [mailto:owner-gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org] On Behalf Of Julie Hedlund Sent: Thursday, February 20, 2014 7:42 PM To: gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org Subject: Re: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] Purpose of the Study and the Survey Dear PDP WG members, More on this point, Sarmad has confirmed in today's meeting that the survey has gone out but that input is still welcome. Best regards, Julie From: Julie Hedlund Date: Thursday, February 20, 2014 9:38 AM To: "gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org" Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] Purpose of the Study and the Survey Dear PDP WG members, As a reminder please see the information below provided by Steve Sheng several weeks ago. I think they may have completed the survey since they requested feedback by 12 February. I will check with Steve. Best regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director ----------- Forwarded from Steve Sheng on 2/3/14 ------------------ 5. Update from Steve Sheng on Study Group to Evaluate Available Solutions for the Submission and Display of Internationalized Contact Data. Thanks Julie and Chris, the study team (copied here) is happy to be on the call to provide an update and answer questions. Please find below is a written summary and a request for feedback on a registrar and registry survey. The purpose of the study is to: 1. Document the submission and display practices of internationalized registration data at a representative set of gTLD and ccTLD registries and registrars. 2. Investigate and document how other e-merchants or web sites manage internationalized contact data. 3. Consider and assess the cost and functionality of commercial, open source, or other known but as yet not widely implemented solutions for 1) transliterating internationalized contact information to US-ASCII, 2) translating internationalized contact information to English, 3) transcribing internationalized contact information to US-ASCII, or 4) a mixture of translation, transliteration and transcription. 4. Consider and assess the accuracy implications for transliteration and translation of the internationalized contact data 5. Based on practices documented in 1 and understanding the issues raised in 3 and 4 and best practices by other e-merchants in 2, summarize some common best practices registry/registrar could do to minimize these variations, if translation and/or transliteration is deemed necessary. The study team is currently on the first task, and has prepared a registry and registrar survey to complete. Since this group is closely working in this area, we appreciate very much if you have any feedback on these survey questions. Such feedback will help us to make sure we ask the right questions. Your feedback by 12 February is much appreciated. More information about the study can be found here: https://community.icann.org/display/whoisird/Study+to+Evaluate+Available+Sol utions+for+the+Submission+and+Display+of+Internationalized+Contact+Data Kind regards, Steve -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: survey-registry.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 105321 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: survey-registrar.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 94300 bytes Desc: not available URL: From julie.hedlund at icann.org Thu Feb 20 19:06:23 2014 From: julie.hedlund at icann.org (Julie Hedlund) Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2014 11:06:23 -0800 Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] Actions: PDP WG on Translation/Transliteration of Contact Info In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Dear PDP WG members, Please see below the actions from our meeting on 20 February. These also are posted to the wiki page at: https://community.icann.org/display/tatcipdp/20+February+2014. Actions: 1. (From 13 February): Think about possible scenarios and check on those that the EWG used in its reports - pay attention to difference between literal and figurative translation 2. Responses from SO/ACs: 3. 4. a) Staff will send reminders to the SOs/ACs to give responses as early as possible, or indicate if they need more time, or whether they want to join the PDP WG face-to-face meeting in Singapore; 5. 6. b) Rudi will reach out to Olivier concerning a meeting with the ALAC in Singapore. 7. 8. c) Rudi also will reach out to a colleague on the ccNSO. 9. 10. Study Group to Evaluate Available Solutions for the Submission and Display of Internationalized Contact Data: The WG will consider whether it will provide input on the survey that has gone out to the registrars and registries. Best regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 5041 bytes Desc: not available URL: From julie.hedlund at icann.org Thu Feb 20 20:50:58 2014 From: julie.hedlund at icann.org (Julie Hedlund) Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2014 12:50:58 -0800 Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] WHOIS-Related Current and Completed Work Message-ID: Dear PDP WG members, In response to the question from Amr today about whether there is WHOIS-related PDP (or other) work that may be addressing the same issues as the PDP WG please see below the list of current and recently completed work. Staff have presented some of this information at various times in the formation of this PDP WG, and via presentations from Margie Milam and Steve Sheng at a previous meeting, but it appears that it would be helpful to put it all in one place to avoid any confusion. One thing to note is that following the Board resolutions on WHOIS in November 2012 a large number of projects (both PDP and non-PDP) were launched and the Board envisioned that these would proceed concurrently, rather than consecutively. See the helpful blog from Margie Milam on all of the WHOIS-related developments at: http://blog.icann.org/2013/03/whois-whats-to-come/. As I noted on today's call, this PDP WG is the only PDP that addresses the specific issues relating to the translation and transliteration of contact information. The work of this PDP WG will be taken into consideration in conjunction with the Board-initiated PDP on gTLD directory services, which is tied to the work of the Expert Working Group on gTLD Directory Services (see below). The final report of the EWG will form the Final Issue Report for that Board-initiated PDP. The Expert Working Group that is defining requirements for internationalized registration data and a corresponding data model for gTLD registries (#3 below) is the group that Jim Galvin is leading. The work of that group is tied closely to that of this PDP WG. Both relate to item #13 in the chart in Margie's blog, which is taken from the Board's work plan. That plan states, "ICANN will form a community working group to determine appropriate internationalized domain name registration data requirements based on requirements set forth in GNSO internationalized registration data working Group final Report." The work this PDP WG will be considered by this EWG so the two groups will coordinate closely. I have added this information to the studies and background page on the wiki at: https://community.icann.org/display/tatcipdp/7.+Studies+and+Background+Docum ents. For a list of active GNSO PDP and non-PDP projects see: http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/active. As you can see, these efforts are very much intertwined. Policies resulting from this PDP WG (if any) will be key elements in future policies relating to the development of a new gTLD directory service, in defining requirements for internationalized registration data, and in the development of the data model for gTLD registries. Please let me know if you have further questions. Best regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director Recently Completed Work: PDP on Thick WHOIS: http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/active/thick-whois The GNSO Council requested an Issue Report on 'thick' Whois at its meeting on 22 September 2011 noting that the Issue Report should 'not only consider a possible requirement of 'thick' WHOIS for all incumbent gTLDs in the context of IRTP, but should also consider any other positive and/or negative effects that are likely to occur outside of IRTP that would need to be taken into account when deciding whether a requirement of 'thick' WHOIS for all incumbent gTLDs would be desirable or not'. The Final Report was adopted by the ICANN Board on 07 February 2014. See the resolution at: http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/documents/resolutions-07feb14-en.htm#2. c. Current Work: 1. Study Group to Evaluate Available Solutions for the Submission and Display of Internationalized Contact Data. See: https://community.icann.org/display/whoisird/Study+to+Evaluate+Available+Sol utions+for+the+Submission+and+Display+of+Internationalized+Contact+Data The purpose of the study is to: 1. Document the submission and display practices of internationalized registration data at a representative set of gTLD and ccTLD registries and registrars. 2. Investigate and document how other e-merchants or web sites manage internationalized contact data. 3. Consider and assess the cost and functionality of commercial, open source, or other known but as yet not widely implemented solutions for 1) transliterating internationalized contact information to US-ASCII, 2) translating internationalized contact information to English, 3) transcribing internationalized contact information to US-ASCII, or 4) a mixture of translation, transliteration and transcription. 4. Consider and assess the accuracy implications for transliteration and translation of the internationalized contact data 5. Based on practices documented in 1 and understanding the issues raised in 3 and 4 and best practices by other e-merchants in 2, summarize some common best practices registry/registrar could do to minimize these variations, if translation and/or transliteration is deemed necessary. The study team is currently on the first task, and has prepared a registry and registrar survey to complete. Since this group is closely working in this area, we appreciate very much if you have any feedback on these survey questions. Such feedback will help us to make sure we ask the right questions. 2. Expert Working Group on gTLD Directory Services, See: http://www.icann.org/en/groups/other/gtld-directory-services 13 December 2012 ? Fadi Chehad?, ICANN's President and CEO, announces the creation of an Expert Working Group on gTLD Directory Services. This first step in fulfilling the ICANN Board's directive to help redefine the purpose and provision of gTLD registration data will provide a foundation to help the ICANN community (through the Generic Names Supporting Organization, GNSO) create a new global policy for gTLD directory services. Interested individuals are invited to indicate their interest in serving as volunteer working group members. Initial Report: http://www.icann.org/en/groups/other/gtld-directory-services/initial-report- 24jun13-en.pdf Status Update Report: http://www.icann.org/en/groups/other/gtld-directory-services/status-update-1 1nov13-en.pdf See the Preliminary Issue Report of the Board-initiated PDP at: http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/gtld-registration-data-15mar13-e n.htm. 3. Expert Working Group to Define Requirements for Internationalized Registration Data and Corresponding Data Model for gTLD Registries See: http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-08jul13-en.htm. As part of the process to implement WHOIS review team recommendations related to Internationalized Domain Name registration data requirements, ICANN seeks volunteers who are community representatives with expertise in linguistics, IDNA, policy and registry/registrar operations to participate in a working group to determine appropriate Internationalized Domain Name registration data requirements and data model for Registration Data Directory Services (aka WHOIS services). The result of the WG product will go through a public comment process to ensure broad input is received. It will form the basis for further policy development and/or contractual framework for generic Top-level domains, as well as ideally becoming a best practice for country code top-level domains. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 5041 bytes Desc: not available URL: From rudi.vansnick at isoc.be Thu Feb 20 20:57:59 2014 From: rudi.vansnick at isoc.be (Rudi Vansnick) Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2014 21:57:59 +0100 Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] WHOIS-Related Current and Completed Work In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Dear Julie, Thank you very much for the quick response and the provided information. Kind regards, Rudi Vansnick NPOC chair Policy Committee NPOC treasurer rudi.vansnick at npoc.org Tel : +32 (0)9 329 39 16 Mobile : +32 (0)475 28 16 32 www.npoc.org Op 20-feb.-2014, om 21:50 heeft Julie Hedlund het volgende geschreven: > Dear PDP WG members, > > In response to the question from Amr today about whether there is WHOIS-related PDP (or other) work that may be addressing the same issues as the PDP WG please see below the list of current and recently completed work. Staff have presented some of this information at various times in the formation of this PDP WG, and via presentations from Margie Milam and Steve Sheng at a previous meeting, but it appears that it would be helpful to put it all in one place to avoid any confusion. One thing to note is that following the Board resolutions on WHOIS in November 2012 a large number of projects (both PDP and non-PDP) were launched and the Board envisioned that these would proceed concurrently, rather than consecutively. See the helpful blog from Margie Milam on all of the WHOIS-related developments at: http://blog.icann.org/2013/03/whois-whats-to-come/. > > As I noted on today's call, this PDP WG is the only PDP that addresses the specific issues relating to the translation and transliteration of contact information. The work of this PDP WG will be taken into consideration in conjunction with the Board-initiated PDP on gTLD directory services, which is tied to the work of the Expert Working Group on gTLD Directory Services (see below). The final report of the EWG will form the Final Issue Report for that Board-initiated PDP. > > The Expert Working Group that is defining requirements for internationalized registration data and a corresponding data model for gTLD registries (#3 below) is the group that Jim Galvin is leading. The work of that group is tied closely to that of this PDP WG. Both relate to item #13 in the chart in Margie's blog, which is taken from the Board's work plan. That plan states, "ICANN will form a community working group to determine appropriate internationalized domain name registration data requirements based on requirements set forth in GNSO internationalized registration data working Group final Report." The work this PDP WG will be considered by this EWG so the two groups will coordinate closely. > > I have added this information to the studies and background page on the wiki at: https://community.icann.org/display/tatcipdp/7.+Studies+and+Background+Documents. For a list of active GNSO PDP and non-PDP projects see: http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/active. > > As you can see, these efforts are very much intertwined. Policies resulting from this PDP WG (if any) will be key elements in future policies relating to the development of a new gTLD directory service, in defining requirements for internationalized registration data, and in the development of the data model for gTLD registries. > > Please let me know if you have further questions. > > Best regards, > Julie > > Julie Hedlund, Policy Director > > Recently Completed Work: > > PDP on Thick WHOIS: http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/active/thick-whois > > The GNSO Council requested an Issue Report on 'thick' Whois at its meeting on 22 September 2011 noting that the Issue Report should 'not only consider a possible requirement of 'thick' WHOIS for all incumbent gTLDs in the context of IRTP, but should also consider any other positive and/or negative effects that are likely to occur outside of IRTP that would need to be taken into account when deciding whether a requirement of 'thick' WHOIS for all incumbent gTLDs would be desirable or not'. > > The Final Report was adopted by the ICANN Board on 07 February 2014. See the resolution at: http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/documents/resolutions-07feb14-en.htm#2.c. > > Current Work: > > 1. Study Group to Evaluate Available Solutions for the Submission and Display of Internationalized Contact Data. > See: https://community.icann.org/display/whoisird/Study+to+Evaluate+Available+Solutions+for+the+Submission+and+Display+of+Internationalized+Contact+Data > > The purpose of the study is to: > Document the submission and display practices of internationalized registration data at a representative set of gTLD and ccTLD registries and registrars. > Investigate and document how other e-merchants or web sites manage internationalized contact data. > Consider and assess the cost and functionality of commercial, open source, or other known but as yet not widely implemented solutions for 1) transliterating internationalized contact information to US-ASCII, 2) translating internationalized contact information to English, 3) transcribing internationalized contact information to US-ASCII, or 4) a mixture of translation, transliteration and transcription. > Consider and assess the accuracy implications for transliteration and translation of the internationalized contact data > Based on practices documented in 1 and understanding the issues raised in 3 and 4 and best practices by other e-merchants in 2, summarize some common best practices registry/registrar could do to minimize these variations, if translation and/or transliteration is deemed necessary. > The study team is currently on the first task, and has prepared a registry and registrar survey to complete. Since this group is closely working in this area, we appreciate very much if you have any feedback on these survey questions. Such feedback will help us to make sure we ask the right questions. > > 2. Expert Working Group on gTLD Directory Services, See: http://www.icann.org/en/groups/other/gtld-directory-services > > 13 December 2012 ? Fadi Chehad?, ICANN's President and CEO, announces the creation of an Expert Working Group on gTLD Directory Services. This first step in fulfilling the ICANN Board's directive to help redefine the purpose and provision of gTLD registration data will provide a foundation to help the ICANN community (through the Generic Names Supporting Organization, GNSO) create a new global policy for gTLD directory services. Interested individuals are invited to indicate their interest in serving as volunteer working group members. > Initial Report: http://www.icann.org/en/groups/other/gtld-directory-services/initial-report-24jun13-en.pdf > Status Update Report: http://www.icann.org/en/groups/other/gtld-directory-services/status-update-11nov13-en.pdf > See the Preliminary Issue Report of the Board-initiated PDP at: http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/gtld-registration-data-15mar13-en.htm. > > 3. Expert Working Group to Define Requirements for Internationalized Registration Data and Corresponding Data Model for gTLD Registries > See: http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-08jul13-en.htm. > > As part of the process to implement WHOIS review team recommendations related to Internationalized Domain Name registration data requirements, ICANN seeks volunteers who are community representatives with expertise in linguistics, IDNA, policy and registry/registrar operations to participate in a working group to determine appropriate Internationalized Domain Name registration data requirements and data model for Registration Data Directory Services (aka WHOIS services). The result of the WG product will go through a public comment process to ensure broad input is received. It will form the basis for further policy development and/or contractual framework for generic Top-level domains, as well as ideally becoming a best practice for country code top-level domains. > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 495 bytes Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail URL: From aelsadr at egyptig.org Fri Feb 21 16:59:03 2014 From: aelsadr at egyptig.org (Amr Elsadr) Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2014 17:59:03 +0100 Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] Purpose of the Study and the Survey In-Reply-To: <530632bb.4205c20a.2162.633d@mx.google.com> References: <530632bb.4205c20a.2162.633d@mx.google.com> Message-ID: Hi Sarmad, On Feb 20, 2014, at 5:52 PM, Sarmad Hussain wrote: [SNIP] > 2. Regarding when the interim information will be available from the Transformation study, we have requested Julie and Lars to fit in an update from the study group to this IRD PDP WG in Singapore, so that we can share with you what we already have sooner than April. Thanks to you, Julie and Lars. I imagine there will be some very substantive findings in this study, even in its earliest form, to help with our discussions. Amr -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From aelsadr at egyptig.org Fri Feb 21 17:27:41 2014 From: aelsadr at egyptig.org (Amr Elsadr) Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2014 18:27:41 +0100 Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] WHOIS-Related Current and Completed Work In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5F225881-CBB2-4B4A-BA70-60275C700BD3@egyptig.org> Hi Julie, Thanks for laying this all out for us. It?s quite helpful. Just in case I wasn?t clear during the call, my comment/question was related to two of the questions this PDP has been chartered to answer and listed on a separate page on the WG wiki: Q6. When would policy come into effect? I imagine that the timelines involved in the concurrent projects will influence the answer to this question, of course also depending on what this WG recommends on how desirable or undesirable it is to translate and/or transliterate contact info. The EWG on gTLD Directory Services is wrapping up its work with the public comment period on their report nearing conclusion. I guess this means we can expect an issue report on this soon. Q7. What should be mandatory? Although I personally think it would have been helpful for this PDP to address what data elements in registrants' contact info should be translated, this is not a really relevant observation right now. It is clearly outside of our scope, and in answering this question, we need to focus on wether it should be mandatory to translate/transliterate contact info associated with all gTLDs as well as for all registrants in all countries. Perhaps, in light of all the projects potentially influencing this PDP and their timelines, we should start discussing the order in which we would like to answer our charter questions. That is assuming we?re settled on the actual questions. :) Thanks. Amr On Feb 20, 2014, at 9:50 PM, Julie Hedlund wrote: > Dear PDP WG members, > > In response to the question from Amr today about whether there is WHOIS-related PDP (or other) work that may be addressing the same issues as the PDP WG please see below the list of current and recently completed work. Staff have presented some of this information at various times in the formation of this PDP WG, and via presentations from Margie Milam and Steve Sheng at a previous meeting, but it appears that it would be helpful to put it all in one place to avoid any confusion. One thing to note is that following the Board resolutions on WHOIS in November 2012 a large number of projects (both PDP and non-PDP) were launched and the Board envisioned that these would proceed concurrently, rather than consecutively. See the helpful blog from Margie Milam on all of the WHOIS-related developments at: http://blog.icann.org/2013/03/whois-whats-to-come/. > > As I noted on today's call, this PDP WG is the only PDP that addresses the specific issues relating to the translation and transliteration of contact information. The work of this PDP WG will be taken into consideration in conjunction with the Board-initiated PDP on gTLD directory services, which is tied to the work of the Expert Working Group on gTLD Directory Services (see below). The final report of the EWG will form the Final Issue Report for that Board-initiated PDP. > > The Expert Working Group that is defining requirements for internationalized registration data and a corresponding data model for gTLD registries (#3 below) is the group that Jim Galvin is leading. The work of that group is tied closely to that of this PDP WG. Both relate to item #13 in the chart in Margie's blog, which is taken from the Board's work plan. That plan states, "ICANN will form a community working group to determine appropriate internationalized domain name registration data requirements based on requirements set forth in GNSO internationalized registration data working Group final Report." The work this PDP WG will be considered by this EWG so the two groups will coordinate closely. > > I have added this information to the studies and background page on the wiki at: https://community.icann.org/display/tatcipdp/7.+Studies+and+Background+Documents. For a list of active GNSO PDP and non-PDP projects see: http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/active. > > As you can see, these efforts are very much intertwined. Policies resulting from this PDP WG (if any) will be key elements in future policies relating to the development of a new gTLD directory service, in defining requirements for internationalized registration data, and in the development of the data model for gTLD registries. > > Please let me know if you have further questions. > > Best regards, > Julie > > Julie Hedlund, Policy Director > > Recently Completed Work: > > PDP on Thick WHOIS: http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/active/thick-whois > > The GNSO Council requested an Issue Report on 'thick' Whois at its meeting on 22 September 2011 noting that the Issue Report should 'not only consider a possible requirement of 'thick' WHOIS for all incumbent gTLDs in the context of IRTP, but should also consider any other positive and/or negative effects that are likely to occur outside of IRTP that would need to be taken into account when deciding whether a requirement of 'thick' WHOIS for all incumbent gTLDs would be desirable or not'. > > The Final Report was adopted by the ICANN Board on 07 February 2014. See the resolution at: http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/documents/resolutions-07feb14-en.htm#2.c. > > Current Work: > > 1. Study Group to Evaluate Available Solutions for the Submission and Display of Internationalized Contact Data. > See: https://community.icann.org/display/whoisird/Study+to+Evaluate+Available+Solutions+for+the+Submission+and+Display+of+Internationalized+Contact+Data > > The purpose of the study is to: > Document the submission and display practices of internationalized registration data at a representative set of gTLD and ccTLD registries and registrars. > Investigate and document how other e-merchants or web sites manage internationalized contact data. > Consider and assess the cost and functionality of commercial, open source, or other known but as yet not widely implemented solutions for 1) transliterating internationalized contact information to US-ASCII, 2) translating internationalized contact information to English, 3) transcribing internationalized contact information to US-ASCII, or 4) a mixture of translation, transliteration and transcription. > Consider and assess the accuracy implications for transliteration and translation of the internationalized contact data > Based on practices documented in 1 and understanding the issues raised in 3 and 4 and best practices by other e-merchants in 2, summarize some common best practices registry/registrar could do to minimize these variations, if translation and/or transliteration is deemed necessary. > The study team is currently on the first task, and has prepared a registry and registrar survey to complete. Since this group is closely working in this area, we appreciate very much if you have any feedback on these survey questions. Such feedback will help us to make sure we ask the right questions. > > 2. Expert Working Group on gTLD Directory Services, See: http://www.icann.org/en/groups/other/gtld-directory-services > > 13 December 2012 ? Fadi Chehad?, ICANN's President and CEO, announces the creation of an Expert Working Group on gTLD Directory Services. This first step in fulfilling the ICANN Board's directive to help redefine the purpose and provision of gTLD registration data will provide a foundation to help the ICANN community (through the Generic Names Supporting Organization, GNSO) create a new global policy for gTLD directory services. Interested individuals are invited to indicate their interest in serving as volunteer working group members. > Initial Report: http://www.icann.org/en/groups/other/gtld-directory-services/initial-report-24jun13-en.pdf > Status Update Report: http://www.icann.org/en/groups/other/gtld-directory-services/status-update-11nov13-en.pdf > See the Preliminary Issue Report of the Board-initiated PDP at: http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/gtld-registration-data-15mar13-en.htm. > > 3. Expert Working Group to Define Requirements for Internationalized Registration Data and Corresponding Data Model for gTLD Registries > See: http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-08jul13-en.htm. > > As part of the process to implement WHOIS review team recommendations related to Internationalized Domain Name registration data requirements, ICANN seeks volunteers who are community representatives with expertise in linguistics, IDNA, policy and registry/registrar operations to participate in a working group to determine appropriate Internationalized Domain Name registration data requirements and data model for Registration Data Directory Services (aka WHOIS services). The result of the WG product will go through a public comment process to ensure broad input is received. It will form the basis for further policy development and/or contractual framework for generic Top-level domains, as well as ideally becoming a best practice for country code top-level domains. > > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From julie.hedlund at icann.org Fri Feb 21 18:50:43 2014 From: julie.hedlund at icann.org (Julie Hedlund) Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2014 10:50:43 -0800 Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] WHOIS-Related Current and Completed Work In-Reply-To: <5F225881-CBB2-4B4A-BA70-60275C700BD3@egyptig.org> References: <5F225881-CBB2-4B4A-BA70-60275C700BD3@egyptig.org> Message-ID: Hi Amr, Thank you very much for the helpful clarification and the context for your comments/questions. I agree that the WG may want to place the questions in some order of priority. Best regards, Julie From: Amr Elsadr Date: Friday, February 21, 2014 12:27 PM To: Julie Hedlund Cc: "gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org" Subject: Re: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] WHOIS-Related Current and Completed Work Hi Julie, Thanks for laying this all out for us. It?s quite helpful. Just in case I wasn?t clear during the call, my comment/question was related to two of the questions this PDP has been chartered to answer and listed on a separate page on the WG wiki : Q6. When would policy come into effect? I imagine that the timelines involved in the concurrent projects will influence the answer to this question, of course also depending on what this WG recommends on how desirable or undesirable it is to translate and/or transliterate contact info. The EWG on gTLD Directory Services is wrapping up its work with the public comment period on their report nearing conclusion. I guess this means we can expect an issue report on this soon. Q7. What should be mandatory? Although I personally think it would have been helpful for this PDP to address what data elements in registrants' contact info should be translated, this is not a really relevant observation right now. It is clearly outside of our scope, and in answering this question, we need to focus on wether it should be mandatory to translate/transliterate contact info associated with all gTLDs as well as for all registrants in all countries. Perhaps, in light of all the projects potentially influencing this PDP and their timelines, we should start discussing the order in which we would like to answer our charter questions. That is assuming we?re settled on the actual questions. :) Thanks. Amr On Feb 20, 2014, at 9:50 PM, Julie Hedlund wrote: > Dear PDP WG members, > > In response to the question from Amr today about whether there is > WHOIS-related PDP (or other) work that may be addressing the same issues as > the PDP WG please see below the list of current and recently completed work. > Staff have presented some of this information at various times in the > formation of this PDP WG, and via presentations from Margie Milam and Steve > Sheng at a previous meeting, but it appears that it would be helpful to put it > all in one place to avoid any confusion. One thing to note is that following > the Board resolutions on WHOIS in November 2012 a large number of projects > (both PDP and non-PDP) were launched and the Board envisioned that these would > proceed concurrently, rather than consecutively. See the helpful blog from > Margie Milam on all of the WHOIS-related developments at: > http://blog.icann.org/2013/03/whois-whats-to-come/. > > As I noted on today's call, this PDP WG is the only PDP that addresses the > specific issues relating to the translation and transliteration of contact > information. The work of this PDP WG will be taken into consideration in > conjunction with the Board-initiated PDP on gTLD directory services, which is > tied to the work of the Expert Working Group on gTLD Directory Services (see > below). The final report of the EWG will form the Final Issue Report for that > Board-initiated PDP. > > The Expert Working Group that is defining requirements for internationalized > registration data and a corresponding data model for gTLD registries (#3 > below) is the group that Jim Galvin is leading. The work of that group is > tied closely to that of this PDP WG. Both relate to item #13 in the chart in > Margie's blog, which is taken from the Board's work plan. That plan states, > "ICANN will form a community working group to determine appropriate > internationalized domain name registration data requirements based on > requirements set forth in GNSO internationalized registration data working > Group final Report." The work this PDP WG will be considered by this EWG so > the two groups will coordinate closely. > > I have added this information to the studies and background page on the wiki > at: > https://community.icann.org/display/tatcipdp/7.+Studies+and+Background+Documen > ts. For a list of active GNSO PDP and non-PDP projects see: > http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/active. > > As you can see, these efforts are very much intertwined. Policies resulting > from this PDP WG (if any) will be key elements in future policies relating to > the development of a new gTLD directory service, in defining requirements for > internationalized registration data, and in the development of the data model > for gTLD registries. > > Please let me know if you have further questions. > > Best regards, > Julie > > Julie Hedlund, Policy Director > > Recently Completed Work: > > PDP on Thick WHOIS: > http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/active/thick-whois > > The GNSO Council requested an Issue Report on 'thick' Whois at its meeting on > 22 September 2011 noting that the Issue Report should 'not only consider a > possible requirement of 'thick' WHOIS for all incumbent gTLDs in the context > of IRTP, but should also consider any other positive and/or negative effects > that are likely to occur outside of IRTP that would need to be taken into > account when deciding whether a requirement of 'thick' WHOIS for all incumbent > gTLDs would be desirable or not'. > > The Final Report was adopted by the ICANN Board on 07 February 2014. See the > resolution at: > http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/documents/resolutions-07feb14-en.htm#2.c. > > Current Work: > > 1. Study Group to Evaluate Available Solutions for the Submission and Display > of Internationalized Contact Data. > See: > https://community.icann.org/display/whoisird/Study+to+Evaluate+Available+Solut > ions+for+the+Submission+and+Display+of+Internationalized+Contact+Data > tions+for+the+Submission+and+Display+of+Internationalized+Contact+Data> > > The purpose of the study is to: > 1. Document the submission and display practices of internationalized > registration data at a representative set of gTLD and ccTLD registries and > registrars. > 2. Investigate and document how other e-merchants or web sites manage > internationalized contact data. > 3. Consider and assess the cost and functionality of commercial, open source, > or other known but as yet not widely implemented solutions for 1) > transliterating internationalized contact information to US-ASCII, 2) > translating internationalized contact information to English, 3) transcribing > internationalized contact information to US-ASCII, or 4) a mixture of > translation, transliteration and transcription. > 4. Consider and assess the accuracy implications for transliteration and > translation of the internationalized contact data > 5. Based on practices documented in 1 and understanding the issues raised in > 3 and 4 and best practices by other e-merchants in 2, summarize some common > best practices registry/registrar could do to minimize these variations, if > translation and/or transliteration is deemed necessary. > The study team is currently on the first task, and has prepared a registry > and registrar survey to complete. Since this group is closely working in this > area, we appreciate very much if you have any feedback on these survey > questions. Such feedback will help us to make sure we ask the right questions. > > 2. Expert Working Group on gTLD Directory Services, See: > http://www.icann.org/en/groups/other/gtld-directory-services > > 13 December 2012 ? Fadi Chehad?, ICANN's President and CEO, announces the > creation of an Expert Working Group on gTLD Directory Services. This first > step in fulfilling the ICANN Board's directive to help redefine the purpose > and provision of gTLD registration data will provide a foundation to help the > ICANN community (through the Generic Names Supporting Organization, GNSO) > create a new global policy for gTLD directory services. Interested individuals > are invited to indicate their interest in serving as volunteer working group > members. > Initial Report: > http://www.icann.org/en/groups/other/gtld-directory-services/initial-report-24 > jun13-en.pdf > Status Update Report: > http://www.icann.org/en/groups/other/gtld-directory-services/status-update-11n > ov13-en.pdf > See the Preliminary Issue Report of the Board-initiated PDP at: > http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/gtld-registration-data-15mar13-en. > htm. > > 3. Expert Working Group to Define Requirements for Internationalized > Registration Data and Corresponding Data Model for gTLD Registries > See: http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-08jul13-en.htm. > > As part of the process to implement WHOIS review team recommendations related > to Internationalized Domain Name registration data requirements, ICANN seeks > volunteers who are community representatives with expertise in linguistics, > IDNA, policy and registry/registrar operations to participate in a working > group to determine appropriate Internationalized Domain Name registration data > requirements and data model for Registration Data Directory Services (aka > WHOIS services). The result of the WG product will go through a public > comment process to ensure broad input is received. It will form the basis for > further policy development and/or contractual framework for generic Top-level > domains, as well as ideally becoming a best practice for country code > top-level domains. > > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 5041 bytes Desc: not available URL: From lars.hoffmann at icann.org Mon Feb 24 14:09:57 2014 From: lars.hoffmann at icann.org (Lars Hoffmann) Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2014 06:09:57 -0800 Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] FW: Request for input Message-ID: Dear Working Group members, Please find below the response from Olof Nordling, ICANN Senior Director GAC Relations, with regard to the WG's request to meet with the GAC in Singapore. Spoiler alert: It's not good news. It might be useful at this stage for the Chairs (or staff if you wish so) to re-send the input request to the individual GAC members that were contacted and have not yet replied as this might be at this stage the most promising way to gather at least some input from some of the GAC members. Best wishes, Lars From: Olof Nordling > Date: Monday, February 24, 2014 2:59 PM To: Lars Hoffmann > Cc: "gacsec at gac.icann.org" >, Julie Hedlund > Subject: RE: Request for input Dear Lars, Thank you for your kind request from the WG on Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information for input from the GAC and for a meeting in Singapore. This has been brought to the GAC Chair?s attention. On her behalf I must inform you that, in view of the time available and the current number of priority matters to address by the GAC where a joint position is essential, any joint response by the GAC to the questions raised cannot realistically be foreseen. Nor does the time allow for a separate meeting with the WG in Singapore. Very best regards Olof -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Glen at icann.org Tue Feb 25 09:45:51 2014 From: Glen at icann.org (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Glen_de_Saint_G=E9ry?=) Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2014 01:45:51 -0800 Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] TR: Input Request:Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information Charter Questions In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: FYI De : Wanawit Ahkuputra Envoy? : mardi 25 f?vrier 2014 10:22 ? : Glen de Saint G?ry Cc : gnso-secs at icann.org; Lars Hoffmann; GAC Secretariat; Hugh Thaweesak Koanantakool; Pitinan Objet : Re: Input Request:Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information Charter Questions Dear GNSO Secretariat; Reference made to your letter on 5 February 2014: Input Request: Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information Charter Questions. On the role of our official position as the GAC Representative of Thailand to ICANN and Deputy Executive Director of Electronic Transaction Development Agency, Ministry of Information and Technology, Royal Thai Government; and also the fact that we had been participated as individual memberer in Charter Drafting Team of Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information PDP working group. We would like to give some thoughts and express our opinions on this issue for the Working Group as follow: Input Request Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information Charter Questions Whether it is desirable to translate contact information to a single common language or transliterate contact information to a single common script. Reference from http://www.academia.edu/3830294/English_as_a_Lingua_Franca_in_Thailand_Characterisations_and_Implications " Given that Thailand does not have a history of colonisation by the British and that English is not an official language in the country, Thailand is typically classified as an 'expanding circle' country (Kachru, 2005) in which English is used as a means of intercultural communication. Importantly such a classification also entails that Thailand is a norm dependent country which does not have its own variety of English and which does not use English for intra cultural communication. While the extent to which this classification of English in Thailand will be questioned in this paper, the expanding circle tag serves as a useful, if simplified, means for distinguishing Thailand from countries which use English as a first language, or as an official second language. The linguistic landscape of Thailand is often portrayed as monolingual and highly homogenous with government sources claiming that almost 100% of the population speak standard Thai (National Identity Board, 2000). As might be expected this hides a more complex linguistic picture. Other languages including Chinese, Malay, Lao, and Khmer are also spoken by minority groups (National Identity Board, 2000; Foley, 2005) and the majority of the population use one of the four regional dialects of Thai rather than standard Thai (Simpson and Thammasathien 2007). Nevertheless, given the relatively minor status given to other languages in the country, English forms the 'de facto' second language of Thailand. There are a number of domains in which English is widely used in Thailand including: as a compulsory subject in school and in higher education, as a medium of instruction in international education programs, as the language of international organisations and conferences (including ASEAN and ASEAN +3), for international business transactions, tourism, the internet, global advertising, scientific and technology transfer, media (including imported films and music), international safety and international law(Wongsatorn et al 1996; 2003; Foley, 2005)" From the reference, even English has given the relatively minor status and not being used for intracultural communication, English, however, is the 'de facto' for intercultural communication and international business transactions including the internet. Therefore, It is quite clear that it is desirable to translate contact information to a single common language or transliterate contact information to a single common script and preferable in English. What exactly the benefits to the community are of translating and/or transliterating contact information, especially in light of the costs that may be connected to translation and/or transliteration? As the result of using single official language system, most of the contact information used is in Thai and the translating and/or transliterating of contact information form Thai to English has been loosely handling by applicants or data owners. Several government entities handling English contact information by accepting the information given by data owners per se, therefore, it is possible that the English contact information is inconsistent. In other cases which government bodies need to provide English contact information such as the geographical name of a street. There are several related standards such as 'Romanization' by Royal Institute, 'the list of exception or reserved words' by geographical name committee. The result of adopting these standards appears in the list of geographical names for places in Thailand in UNGEGN (United Nations Group of Experts on Geographical Names). However, the standards are not widely known and it is not mandatory to adopt. Therefore, it is possible that each government entity could use different method for translation and/or transliteration. >From the stated current condition, if the contact information needs validation, it could be a burden trying to figure out the suitable reference, if any. We have no objection with the approach from the Translation and Transliteration of Whois Contact Information DPD Working Group that this issue is tightly related to the role of government. Currently we are under the consideration to provide the infrastructure for translation and/or transliteration as the single registry system. This approach could benefit as in the most accurate reference for contact information in English and the validation could be handled at the most economic cost. Should translation and/or transliteration of contact information be mandatory for all gTLDs? We support that it should be mandatory. From the statistic, around one-third of the domain names in Thailand registered with ccTLD (.th) and anther two-third of the names are gTLD, which is open to all ICANN's registrars. Many cases that Thai domain owner registers for a domain name from foreign registrar, as the nature of internet is borderless. Not having translation and/or transliteration mandatory for all gTLD would create discrimination to registries and registrars. However to minimize the impact to the cost bearer, the translation and/or transliteration of local language to common language should be established in each country. And this methodology should be accredited by ICANN. Should translation and/or transliteration of contact information be mandatory for all registrants or only those based in certain countries and/or using specific non-ASCII scripts? It is unarguable that the translation and/or transliteration should be mandatory for those cased based in non-ASCII script countries. So it is possible that the non-ASCII script countries have higher priority to catalyst this issue. What impact will translation/transliteration of contact information have on the WHOIS validation as set out under the 2013 Registrar Accreditation Agreement? Reference to section: Whois Accuracy Program Specification ?1(e), "Validate that all postal address fields are consistent across fields (for example: street exists in city, city exists in state/province, city matches postal code) where such information is technically and commercially feaible for the applicable country or territory." This could draw to the question of who would make the decision if a country or territory is technically and commercially feasible and what would be the decision making criteria. As the validation of all postal address both newly registered and the backlog could be costly, it might turn out that not many territories or countries is feasible to comply. Reference to section: Whois Accuracy Program Specification ?1(f) and ?2 "if Registrar does not receive an affirmative response from the Account Holder, Registrar shall verify the applicable contact information manually" It occurs in Thailand that more than half of the domain name owners using gTLD and it is possible to choose foreign Registrars. The manual verification might occur when registrar does not receive an affirmative response via email or phone. Even it is not specified the method, this manual verification could costly for Registrar when it is cross-border verification. This also emphasizes the need of single point of registration system for common language/script of contact information for each country. To minimize any cost that might occur during verification, and the more important point is to provide the eligible contact address information. When should any new policy relating to translation and transliteration of contact information come into effect? (Reference: http://docs.apwg.org/reports/APWG_GlobaTolPhishingSurvey_1H2013.pdf) Thailand has been, disappointedly, in the top-5 of phishing for the past several years. From our view, we see that having translation and transliteration pocily in place would be one of the phishing mitigations as the verified contact information would be the important eligible linkage between internet identities to the real person. We encourage that this policy should come into effect at the earliest possible timeline. Do you have suggestions concerning the basic principles to guide the cost burden discussion, such as the free of charge provision of the information, demand-oriented cost etc.? In particular, the PDP WG is tasked with determining who should decide who should bear the burden translating contact information to a single common language or transliterating contact information to a single common script. This question relates to the concern expressed by the Internationalized Registration Data Working Group (IRD-WG) in its report that there are costs associated with providing translation and transliteration of contact information. For example, if a policy development process (PDP) determined that the registrar must translate or transliterate contact information, this policy would place a cost burden on the registrar. In compliance with the "Proposal by THAILAND's Government Advisory Committee (GAC)" submitted into the PDP working group earlier, it is government role to facilitate establishment of the infrastructure for translation/transliteration of contact information. Once the infrastructure is in place, the cost of translation/transliteration and the cost of validation should be economic. This eligible registered contact address information will also be applicable for many other applications for data owner, not limited to ICANN whois database but it could also benefit the e-invoice and all electronic transaction services. We would suggest considering demand-oriented approach for this matter. In this case, the demand to translate/transliterate and maintain contact address information is belong to the data owners or registrants, and the demand for address validation could be from registrars. Therefore, the cost of conversion from local language into common language should belong to registrants and the cost for validation should belong to registrars. We are looking forward to gather for a face-to-face meeting during the ICANN Meeting in Singapore. Regards Mr. Wanawit Ahkuputra Deputy Executive Director ETDA Electronic Transactions Development Agency (Public Organization) MICT Ministry of Information and Communication Technology The Government Complex Commemorating His Majesty the King's 80th Birthday Anniversary 120 M.3 Ratthaprasasanabhakti Building (building B), 7th floor, Chaengwattana Rd., Thung Song Hong, Laksi Bangkok 10210, THAILAND Tel : +66 2142 1159 Fax. +66 2143 8071 Mobile +669 301 8818 E-Mail: wanawit at etda.or.th On Feb 5, 2557 BE, at 5:35 AM, Glen de Saint G?ry > wrote: Dear GAC representative, dear Thaweesak As you may be aware, the GNSO Council recently initiated a Policy Development Process (PDP) on the Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information; the relevant Issue Report can be found here. A more detailed background is available online on the Working Group's Wiki where you can also consult the Charter. As part of its efforts to obtain broad input from the ICANN Community at an early stage and we have written to Ms Heather Dryden, Chair of the GAC, already to solicit feedback from the GAC where possible. However, as the matter of translating and/or transliteration of Contact information will be of special significance for countries that do not use Latin Scripts, we thought it useful to contact individual GAC representatives. Please note that we do not seek an official position on this matter but rather would welcome any thoughts and/or experiences you might have and what the best practice might be or ought to be in your country on this matter. An informal response to any of the questions below or any other thoughts you might have on the issue of translation and transliteration of Contact Information would be very much appreciated. Please send these to the GNSO Secretariat (gnso.secretariat at gnso.icann.org) who will forward these to the Working Group; ideally by Tuesday 11 March 2014. Finally, our Working Group is planning to gather for a face-to-face meeting during the forthcoming ICANN Meeting in Singapore. We would be delighted if you could join our discussions should you be in Singapore at the time. We will renew this invitation closer to the time when we have finalized our meeting time and agenda. Many thanks and best wishes, Chris Dillon (Co-Chair) Rudi Vansnick (Co-Chair) Input Request Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information Charter Questions Whether it is desirable to translate contact information to a single common language or transliterate contact information to a single common script. What exactly the benefits to the community are of translating and/or transliterating contact information, especially in light of the costs that may be connected to translation and/or transliteration? Should translation and/or transliteration of contact information be mandatory for all gTLDs? Should translation and/or transliteration of contact information be mandatory for all registrants or only those based in certain countries and/or using specific non-ASCII scripts? What impact will translation/transliteration of contact information have on the WHOIS validation as set out under the 2013 Registrar Accreditation Agreement? When should any new policy relating to translation and transliteration of contact information come into effect? Do you have suggestions concerning the basic principles to guide the cost burden discussion, such as the free of charge provision of the information, demand-oriented cost etc.? In particular, the PDP WG is tasked with determining who should decide who should bear the burden translating contact information to a single common language or transliterating contact information to a single common script. This question relates to the concern expressed by the Internationalized Registration Data Working Group (IRD-WG) in its report that there are costs associated with providing translation and transliteration of contact information. For example, if a policy development process (PDP) determined that the registrar must translate or transliterate contact information, this policy would place a cost burden on the registrar. Glen de Saint G?ry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat at gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From c.dillon at ucl.ac.uk Tue Feb 25 15:19:57 2014 From: c.dillon at ucl.ac.uk (Dillon, Chris) Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2014 15:19:57 +0000 Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] RE: Input Request:Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information Charter Questions In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Dear colleagues, I have added this Thai letter to https://community.icann.org/display/tatcipdp/List+of+correspondence+received . Please have a critical look at it and make any comments either before the meeting on this list or during agenda point 4: https://community.icann.org/display/tatcipdp/27+February+2014 I have added the two main questions (and sub-questions) from the charter for your convenience and for discussion under agenda point 5. We will be considering the prioritization of the questions. Breaking difficult questions into several easier ones is only one possible working methodology and we are open to other approaches. Again, please make any comments either before the meeting or during agenda point 6. Although at least one of the Study for the Submission and Display of Internationalized Contact Data's surveys has been opened, they will be raised under AOB for any comments. Regards, Chris. -- Research Associate in Linguistic Computing, Centre for Digital Humanities, UCL, Gower St, London WC1E 6BT Tel +44 20 7679 1599 (int 31599) ucl.ac.uk/dis/people/chrisdillon From: owner-gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org [mailto:owner-gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org] On Behalf Of Glen de Saint G?ry Sent: 25 February 2014 09:46 To: gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] TR: Input Request:Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information Charter Questions FYI De : Wanawit Ahkuputra Envoy? : mardi 25 f?vrier 2014 10:22 ? : Glen de Saint G?ry Cc : gnso-secs at icann.org; Lars Hoffmann; GAC Secretariat; Hugh Thaweesak Koanantakool; Pitinan Objet : Re: Input Request:Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information Charter Questions Dear GNSO Secretariat; Reference made to your letter on 5 February 2014: Input Request: Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information Charter Questions. On the role of our official position as the GAC Representative of Thailand to ICANN and Deputy Executive Director of Electronic Transaction Development Agency, Ministry of Information and Technology, Royal Thai Government; and also the fact that we had been participated as individual memberer in Charter Drafting Team of Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information PDP working group. We would like to give some thoughts and express our opinions on this issue for the Working Group as follow: Input Request Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information Charter Questions Whether it is desirable to translate contact information to a single common language or transliterate contact information to a single common script. Reference from http://www.academia.edu/3830294/English_as_a_Lingua_Franca_in_Thailand_Characterisations_and_Implications " Given that Thailand does not have a history of colonisation by the British and that English is not an official language in the country, Thailand is typically classified as an 'expanding circle' country (Kachru, 2005) in which English is used as a means of intercultural communication. Importantly such a classification also entails that Thailand is a norm dependent country which does not have its own variety of English and which does not use English for intra cultural communication. While the extent to which this classification of English in Thailand will be questioned in this paper, the expanding circle tag serves as a useful, if simplified, means for distinguishing Thailand from countries which use English as a first language, or as an official second language. The linguistic landscape of Thailand is often portrayed as monolingual and highly homogenous with government sources claiming that almost 100% of the population speak standard Thai (National Identity Board, 2000). As might be expected this hides a more complex linguistic picture. Other languages including Chinese, Malay, Lao, and Khmer are also spoken by minority groups (National Identity Board, 2000; Foley, 2005) and the majority of the population use one of the four regional dialects of Thai rather than standard Thai (Simpson and Thammasathien 2007). Nevertheless, given the relatively minor status given to other languages in the country, English forms the 'de facto' second language of Thailand. There are a number of domains in which English is widely used in Thailand including: as a compulsory subject in school and in higher education, as a medium of instruction in international education programs, as the language of international organisations and conferences (including ASEAN and ASEAN +3), for international business transactions, tourism, the internet, global advertising, scientific and technology transfer, media (including imported films and music), international safety and international law(Wongsatorn et al 1996; 2003; Foley, 2005)" From the reference, even English has given the relatively minor status and not being used for intracultural communication, English, however, is the 'de facto' for intercultural communication and international business transactions including the internet. Therefore, It is quite clear that it is desirable to translate contact information to a single common language or transliterate contact information to a single common script and preferable in English. What exactly the benefits to the community are of translating and/or transliterating contact information, especially in light of the costs that may be connected to translation and/or transliteration? As the result of using single official language system, most of the contact information used is in Thai and the translating and/or transliterating of contact information form Thai to English has been loosely handling by applicants or data owners. Several government entities handling English contact information by accepting the information given by data owners per se, therefore, it is possible that the English contact information is inconsistent. In other cases which government bodies need to provide English contact information such as the geographical name of a street. There are several related standards such as 'Romanization' by Royal Institute, 'the list of exception or reserved words' by geographical name committee. The result of adopting these standards appears in the list of geographical names for places in Thailand in UNGEGN (United Nations Group of Experts on Geographical Names). However, the standards are not widely known and it is not mandatory to adopt. Therefore, it is possible that each government entity could use different method for translation and/or transliteration. >From the stated current condition, if the contact information needs validation, it could be a burden trying to figure out the suitable reference, if any. We have no objection with the approach from the Translation and Transliteration of Whois Contact Information DPD Working Group that this issue is tightly related to the role of government. Currently we are under the consideration to provide the infrastructure for translation and/or transliteration as the single registry system. This approach could benefit as in the most accurate reference for contact information in English and the validation could be handled at the most economic cost. Should translation and/or transliteration of contact information be mandatory for all gTLDs? We support that it should be mandatory. From the statistic, around one-third of the domain names in Thailand registered with ccTLD (.th) and anther two-third of the names are gTLD, which is open to all ICANN's registrars. Many cases that Thai domain owner registers for a domain name from foreign registrar, as the nature of internet is borderless. Not having translation and/or transliteration mandatory for all gTLD would create discrimination to registries and registrars. However to minimize the impact to the cost bearer, the translation and/or transliteration of local language to common language should be established in each country. And this methodology should be accredited by ICANN. Should translation and/or transliteration of contact information be mandatory for all registrants or only those based in certain countries and/or using specific non-ASCII scripts? It is unarguable that the translation and/or transliteration should be mandatory for those cased based in non-ASCII script countries. So it is possible that the non-ASCII script countries have higher priority to catalyst this issue. What impact will translation/transliteration of contact information have on the WHOIS validation as set out under the 2013 Registrar Accreditation Agreement? Reference to section: Whois Accuracy Program Specification ?1(e), "Validate that all postal address fields are consistent across fields (for example: street exists in city, city exists in state/province, city matches postal code) where such information is technically and commercially feaible for the applicable country or territory." This could draw to the question of who would make the decision if a country or territory is technically and commercially feasible and what would be the decision making criteria. As the validation of all postal address both newly registered and the backlog could be costly, it might turn out that not many territories or countries is feasible to comply. Reference to section: Whois Accuracy Program Specification ?1(f) and ?2 "if Registrar does not receive an affirmative response from the Account Holder, Registrar shall verify the applicable contact information manually" It occurs in Thailand that more than half of the domain name owners using gTLD and it is possible to choose foreign Registrars. The manual verification might occur when registrar does not receive an affirmative response via email or phone. Even it is not specified the method, this manual verification could costly for Registrar when it is cross-border verification. This also emphasizes the need of single point of registration system for common language/script of contact information for each country. To minimize any cost that might occur during verification, and the more important point is to provide the eligible contact address information. When should any new policy relating to translation and transliteration of contact information come into effect? (Reference: http://docs.apwg.org/reports/APWG_GlobaTolPhishingSurvey_1H2013.pdf) Thailand has been, disappointedly, in the top-5 of phishing for the past several years. From our view, we see that having translation and transliteration pocily in place would be one of the phishing mitigations as the verified contact information would be the important eligible linkage between internet identities to the real person. We encourage that this policy should come into effect at the earliest possible timeline. Do you have suggestions concerning the basic principles to guide the cost burden discussion, such as the free of charge provision of the information, demand-oriented cost etc.? In particular, the PDP WG is tasked with determining who should decide who should bear the burden translating contact information to a single common language or transliterating contact information to a single common script. This question relates to the concern expressed by the Internationalized Registration Data Working Group (IRD-WG) in its report that there are costs associated with providing translation and transliteration of contact information. For example, if a policy development process (PDP) determined that the registrar must translate or transliterate contact information, this policy would place a cost burden on the registrar. In compliance with the "Proposal by THAILAND's Government Advisory Committee (GAC)" submitted into the PDP working group earlier, it is government role to facilitate establishment of the infrastructure for translation/transliteration of contact information. Once the infrastructure is in place, the cost of translation/transliteration and the cost of validation should be economic. This eligible registered contact address information will also be applicable for many other applications for data owner, not limited to ICANN whois database but it could also benefit the e-invoice and all electronic transaction services. We would suggest considering demand-oriented approach for this matter. In this case, the demand to translate/transliterate and maintain contact address information is belong to the data owners or registrants, and the demand for address validation could be from registrars. Therefore, the cost of conversion from local language into common language should belong to registrants and the cost for validation should belong to registrars. We are looking forward to gather for a face-to-face meeting during the ICANN Meeting in Singapore. Regards Mr. Wanawit Ahkuputra Deputy Executive Director ETDA Electronic Transactions Development Agency (Public Organization) MICT Ministry of Information and Communication Technology The Government Complex Commemorating His Majesty the King's 80th Birthday Anniversary 120 M.3 Ratthaprasasanabhakti Building (building B), 7th floor, Chaengwattana Rd., Thung Song Hong, Laksi Bangkok 10210, THAILAND Tel : +66 2142 1159 Fax. +66 2143 8071 Mobile +669 301 8818 E-Mail: wanawit at etda.or.th On Feb 5, 2557 BE, at 5:35 AM, Glen de Saint G?ry > wrote: Dear GAC representative, dear Thaweesak As you may be aware, the GNSO Council recently initiated a Policy Development Process (PDP) on the Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information; the relevant Issue Report can be found here. A more detailed background is available online on the Working Group's Wiki where you can also consult the Charter. As part of its efforts to obtain broad input from the ICANN Community at an early stage and we have written to Ms Heather Dryden, Chair of the GAC, already to solicit feedback from the GAC where possible. However, as the matter of translating and/or transliteration of Contact information will be of special significance for countries that do not use Latin Scripts, we thought it useful to contact individual GAC representatives. Please note that we do not seek an official position on this matter but rather would welcome any thoughts and/or experiences you might have and what the best practice might be or ought to be in your country on this matter. An informal response to any of the questions below or any other thoughts you might have on the issue of translation and transliteration of Contact Information would be very much appreciated. Please send these to the GNSO Secretariat (gnso.secretariat at gnso.icann.org) who will forward these to the Working Group; ideally by Tuesday 11 March 2014. Finally, our Working Group is planning to gather for a face-to-face meeting during the forthcoming ICANN Meeting in Singapore. We would be delighted if you could join our discussions should you be in Singapore at the time. We will renew this invitation closer to the time when we have finalized our meeting time and agenda. Many thanks and best wishes, Chris Dillon (Co-Chair) Rudi Vansnick (Co-Chair) Input Request Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information Charter Questions Whether it is desirable to translate contact information to a single common language or transliterate contact information to a single common script. What exactly the benefits to the community are of translating and/or transliterating contact information, especially in light of the costs that may be connected to translation and/or transliteration? Should translation and/or transliteration of contact information be mandatory for all gTLDs? Should translation and/or transliteration of contact information be mandatory for all registrants or only those based in certain countries and/or using specific non-ASCII scripts? What impact will translation/transliteration of contact information have on the WHOIS validation as set out under the 2013 Registrar Accreditation Agreement? When should any new policy relating to translation and transliteration of contact information come into effect? Do you have suggestions concerning the basic principles to guide the cost burden discussion, such as the free of charge provision of the information, demand-oriented cost etc.? In particular, the PDP WG is tasked with determining who should decide who should bear the burden translating contact information to a single common language or transliterating contact information to a single common script. This question relates to the concern expressed by the Internationalized Registration Data Working Group (IRD-WG) in its report that there are costs associated with providing translation and transliteration of contact information. For example, if a policy development process (PDP) determined that the registrar must translate or transliterate contact information, this policy would place a cost burden on the registrar. Glen de Saint G?ry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat at gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pitinan at etda.or.th Wed Feb 26 05:10:49 2014 From: pitinan at etda.or.th (pitinan) Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2014 12:10:49 +0700 Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] Updates from APPRICOT-2014 Message-ID: <007001cf32b1$1ec32760$5c497620$@etda.or.th> Dear working group members, First of all, kindly accept my apology for being absence from the conference call last week without prior notice. There was the APTLD annual meeting held in conjunction with APRICOT 2014 in Malaysia Feb 20-21, 2014. And we presented there, in the agenda of "Validation of Address Information - and transliteration to a Foreign Language" Therefore, I'd like to update the working group with the presentation slide as attached. The objective of the talk was to encourage each country to be proactive in this issue. Best Regards, Pitinan Kooarmornpatana Assistant Director Office of R&D Electronic Transactions Development Agency (ETDA) +(66) 81 375 3433 pitinan at etda.or.th -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 20140217_APPRICOT_v.05-03.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 1301504 bytes Desc: not available URL: From c.dillon at ucl.ac.uk Wed Feb 26 12:00:23 2014 From: c.dillon at ucl.ac.uk (Dillon, Chris) Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2014 12:00:23 +0000 Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] WHOIS-Related Current and Completed Work In-Reply-To: References: <5F225881-CBB2-4B4A-BA70-60275C700BD3@egyptig.org> Message-ID: <6cdb384f1bfd40fb920314fab9ec62f1@DB3PR01MB234.eurprd01.prod.exchangelabs.com> Dear Amr and colleagues, I will pick up prioritization tomorrow when we discuss the questions and other possible working methodologies. Thank you for summarizing the points you made in last week's call. I have made summaries of last week's discussions on questions 5-7 in the wiki, so that new members and others can get a good idea of what we're doing without listening to all the calls. Obviously I welcome improvements either on this list or in the wiki: https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=44960091 Regards, Chris. -- Research Associate in Linguistic Computing, Centre for Digital Humanities, UCL, Gower St, London WC1E 6BT Tel +44 20 7679 1599 (int 31599) ucl.ac.uk/dis/people/chrisdillon From: owner-gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org [mailto:owner-gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org] On Behalf Of Julie Hedlund Sent: 21 February 2014 18:51 To: Amr Elsadr Cc: gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org Subject: Re: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] WHOIS-Related Current and Completed Work Hi Amr, Thank you very much for the helpful clarification and the context for your comments/questions. I agree that the WG may want to place the questions in some order of priority. Best regards, Julie From: Amr Elsadr > Date: Friday, February 21, 2014 12:27 PM To: Julie Hedlund > Cc: "gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org" > Subject: Re: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] WHOIS-Related Current and Completed Work Hi Julie, Thanks for laying this all out for us. It's quite helpful. Just in case I wasn't clear during the call, my comment/question was related to two of the questions this PDP has been chartered to answer and listed on a separate page on the WG wiki: Q6. When would policy come into effect? I imagine that the timelines involved in the concurrent projects will influence the answer to this question, of course also depending on what this WG recommends on how desirable or undesirable it is to translate and/or transliterate contact info. The EWG on gTLD Directory Services is wrapping up its work with the public comment period on their report nearing conclusion. I guess this means we can expect an issue report on this soon. Q7. What should be mandatory? Although I personally think it would have been helpful for this PDP to address what data elements in registrants' contact info should be translated, this is not a really relevant observation right now. It is clearly outside of our scope, and in answering this question, we need to focus on wether it should be mandatory to translate/transliterate contact info associated with all gTLDs as well as for all registrants in all countries. Perhaps, in light of all the projects potentially influencing this PDP and their timelines, we should start discussing the order in which we would like to answer our charter questions. That is assuming we're settled on the actual questions. :) Thanks. Amr On Feb 20, 2014, at 9:50 PM, Julie Hedlund > wrote: Dear PDP WG members, In response to the question from Amr today about whether there is WHOIS-related PDP (or other) work that may be addressing the same issues as the PDP WG please see below the list of current and recently completed work. Staff have presented some of this information at various times in the formation of this PDP WG, and via presentations from Margie Milam and Steve Sheng at a previous meeting, but it appears that it would be helpful to put it all in one place to avoid any confusion. One thing to note is that following the Board resolutions on WHOIS in November 2012 a large number of projects (both PDP and non-PDP) were launched and the Board envisioned that these would proceed concurrently, rather than consecutively. See the helpful blog from Margie Milam on all of the WHOIS-related developments at: http://blog.icann.org/2013/03/whois-whats-to-come/. As I noted on today's call, this PDP WG is the only PDP that addresses the specific issues relating to the translation and transliteration of contact information. The work of this PDP WG will be taken into consideration in conjunction with the Board-initiated PDP on gTLD directory services, which is tied to the work of the Expert Working Group on gTLD Directory Services (see below). The final report of the EWG will form the Final Issue Report for that Board-initiated PDP. The Expert Working Group that is defining requirements for internationalized registration data and a corresponding data model for gTLD registries (#3 below) is the group that Jim Galvin is leading. The work of that group is tied closely to that of this PDP WG. Both relate to item #13 in the chart in Margie's blog, which is taken from the Board's work plan. That plan states, "ICANN will form a community working group to determine appropriate internationalized domain name registration data requirements based on requirements set forth in GNSO internationalized registration data working Group final Report." The work this PDP WG will be considered by this EWG so the two groups will coordinate closely. I have added this information to the studies and background page on the wiki at: https://community.icann.org/display/tatcipdp/7.+Studies+and+Background+Documents. For a list of active GNSO PDP and non-PDP projects see: http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/active. As you can see, these efforts are very much intertwined. Policies resulting from this PDP WG (if any) will be key elements in future policies relating to the development of a new gTLD directory service, in defining requirements for internationalized registration data, and in the development of the data model for gTLD registries. Please let me know if you have further questions. Best regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director Recently Completed Work: PDP on Thick WHOIS: http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/active/thick-whois The GNSO Council requested an Issue Report on 'thick' Whois at its meeting on 22 September 2011 noting that the Issue Report should 'not only consider a possible requirement of 'thick' WHOIS for all incumbent gTLDs in the context of IRTP, but should also consider any other positive and/or negative effects that are likely to occur outside of IRTP that would need to be taken into account when deciding whether a requirement of 'thick' WHOIS for all incumbent gTLDs would be desirable or not'. The Final Report was adopted by the ICANN Board on 07 February 2014. See the resolution at: http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/documents/resolutions-07feb14-en.htm#2.c. Current Work: 1. Study Group to Evaluate Available Solutions for the Submission and Display of Internationalized Contact Data. See: https://community.icann.org/display/whoisird/Study+to+Evaluate+Available+Solutions+for+the+Submission+and+Display+of+Internationalized+Contact+Data The purpose of the study is to: 1. Document the submission and display practices of internationalized registration data at a representative set of gTLD and ccTLD registries and registrars. 2. Investigate and document how other e-merchants or web sites manage internationalized contact data. 3. Consider and assess the cost and functionality of commercial, open source, or other known but as yet not widely implemented solutions for 1) transliterating internationalized contact information to US-ASCII, 2) translating internationalized contact information to English, 3) transcribing internationalized contact information to US-ASCII, or 4) a mixture of translation, transliteration and transcription. 4. Consider and assess the accuracy implications for transliteration and translation of the internationalized contact data 5. Based on practices documented in 1 and understanding the issues raised in 3 and 4 and best practices by other e-merchants in 2, summarize some common best practices registry/registrar could do to minimize these variations, if translation and/or transliteration is deemed necessary. The study team is currently on the first task, and has prepared a registry and registrar survey to complete. Since this group is closely working in this area, we appreciate very much if you have any feedback on these survey questions. Such feedback will help us to make sure we ask the right questions. 2. Expert Working Group on gTLD Directory Services, See: http://www.icann.org/en/groups/other/gtld-directory-services 13 December 2012 - Fadi Chehad?, ICANN's President and CEO, announces the creation of an Expert Working Group on gTLD Directory Services. This first step in fulfilling the ICANN Board's directive to help redefine the purpose and provision of gTLD registration data will provide a foundation to help the ICANN community (through the Generic Names Supporting Organization, GNSO) create a new global policy for gTLD directory services. Interested individuals are invited to indicate their interest in serving as volunteer working group members. Initial Report: http://www.icann.org/en/groups/other/gtld-directory-services/initial-report-24jun13-en.pdf Status Update Report: http://www.icann.org/en/groups/other/gtld-directory-services/status-update-11nov13-en.pdf See the Preliminary Issue Report of the Board-initiated PDP at: http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/gtld-registration-data-15mar13-en.htm. 3. Expert Working Group to Define Requirements for Internationalized Registration Data and Corresponding Data Model for gTLD Registries See: http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-08jul13-en.htm. As part of the process to implement WHOIS review team recommendations related to Internationalized Domain Name registration data requirements, ICANN seeks volunteers who are community representatives with expertise in linguistics, IDNA, policy and registry/registrar operations to participate in a working group to determine appropriate Internationalized Domain Name registration data requirements and data model for Registration Data Directory Services (aka WHOIS services). The result of the WG product will go through a public comment process to ensure broad input is received. It will form the basis for further policy development and/or contractual framework for generic Top-level domains, as well as ideally becoming a best practice for country code top-level domains. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From c.dillon at ucl.ac.uk Wed Feb 26 12:50:27 2014 From: c.dillon at ucl.ac.uk (Dillon, Chris) Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2014 12:50:27 +0000 Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] Updates from APPRICOT-2014 In-Reply-To: <007001cf32b1$1ec32760$5c497620$@etda.or.th> References: <007001cf32b1$1ec32760$5c497620$@etda.or.th> Message-ID: <5b51bf46431247ad810d58b7323f91ae@DB3PR01MB234.eurprd01.prod.exchangelabs.com> Dear Pitinan, Many, many thanks for your presentation and the practical suggestions it includes. I have taken the liberty of uploading it to the Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information WG wiki on a new page: https://community.icann.org/display/tatcipdp/8+Verification+and+validation It raises some things we have already discussed (e.g. translation/transliteration of addresses and Romanization standards, with some lovely examples) and mentions some standards we haven't yet talked about (UNGEGN and UPU). Regards, Chris. -- Research Associate in Linguistic Computing, Centre for Digital Humanities, UCL, Gower St, London WC1E 6BT Tel +44 20 7679 1599 (int 31599) ucl.ac.uk/dis/people/chrisdillon From: owner-gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org [mailto:owner-gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org] On Behalf Of pitinan Sent: 26 February 2014 05:11 To: gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org Cc: Pitinan Kooarmornpatana; Suntod; Suchayapim; Supachok Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] Updates from APPRICOT-2014 Dear working group members, First of all, kindly accept my apology for being absence from the conference call last week without prior notice. There was the APTLD annual meeting held in conjunction with APRICOT 2014 in Malaysia Feb 20-21, 2014. And we presented there, in the agenda of "Validation of Address Information - and transliteration to a Foreign Language" Therefore, I'd like to update the working group with the presentation slide as attached. The objective of the talk was to encourage each country to be proactive in this issue. Best Regards, Pitinan Kooarmornpatana Assistant Director Office of R&D Electronic Transactions Development Agency (ETDA) +(66) 81 375 3433 pitinan at etda.or.th -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From julie.hedlund at icann.org Wed Feb 26 15:52:31 2014 From: julie.hedlund at icann.org (Julie Hedlund) Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2014 07:52:31 -0800 Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] Slides for GNSO Update Tomorrow Message-ID: Chris, Here are some slides that Lars and I have developed that you can use for the update tomorrow at the GNSO Council meeting. Please let me know ASAP if you have any changes. Thank you, Julie Julie Hedlund, Director, SSAC Support -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 5041 bytes Desc: not available URL: From julie.hedlund at icann.org Wed Feb 26 15:57:21 2014 From: julie.hedlund at icann.org (Julie Hedlund) Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2014 07:57:21 -0800 Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] Attachment re: Slides for GNSO Update Tomorrow Message-ID: Now with the attachment! Julie From: Julie Hedlund Date: Wednesday, February 26, 2014 10:52 AM To: "Dillon, Chris" , Ching Chiao Cc: "gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org" Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] Slides for GNSO Update Tomorrow Chris, Here are some slides that Lars and I have developed that you can use for the update tomorrow at the GNSO Council meeting. Please let me know ASAP if you have any changes. Thank you, Julie Julie Hedlund, Director, SSAC Support -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Update Slides for GNSO Council Meeting 27 Feb 2014.ppt Type: application/vnd.ms-powerpoint Size: 1682432 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 5041 bytes Desc: not available URL: From c.dillon at ucl.ac.uk Wed Feb 26 16:09:47 2014 From: c.dillon at ucl.ac.uk (Dillon, Chris) Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2014 16:09:47 +0000 Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] RE: Attachment re: Slides for GNSO Update Tomorrow In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3d6790a72b58408f8449ac3af792ced5@DB3PR01MB234.eurprd01.prod.exchangelabs.com> Dear Julie, The only substantial change I can see is that it would be good to have the URL of the wiki in there, as anyone interested could use that to see what we're doing including the letters we've received (without listening to all the calls). Regards, Chris. -- Research Associate in Linguistic Computing, Centre for Digital Humanities, UCL, Gower St, London WC1E 6BT Tel +44 20 7679 1599 (int 31599) ucl.ac.uk/dis/people/chrisdillon From: Julie Hedlund [mailto:julie.hedlund at icann.org] Sent: 26 February 2014 15:57 To: Dillon, Chris; Ching Chiao Cc: gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org Subject: Attachment re: Slides for GNSO Update Tomorrow Now with the attachment! Julie From: Julie Hedlund > Date: Wednesday, February 26, 2014 10:52 AM To: "Dillon, Chris" >, Ching Chiao > Cc: "gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org" > Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] Slides for GNSO Update Tomorrow Chris, Here are some slides that Lars and I have developed that you can use for the update tomorrow at the GNSO Council meeting. Please let me know ASAP if you have any changes. Thank you, Julie Julie Hedlund, Director, SSAC Support -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From julie.hedlund at icann.org Wed Feb 26 16:21:49 2014 From: julie.hedlund at icann.org (Julie Hedlund) Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2014 08:21:49 -0800 Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] Re: Attachment re: Slides for GNSO Update Tomorrow In-Reply-To: <3d6790a72b58408f8449ac3af792ced5@DB3PR01MB234.eurprd01.prod.exchangelabs.com> References: <3d6790a72b58408f8449ac3af792ced5@DB3PR01MB234.eurprd01.prod.exchangelabs.com> Message-ID: Dear Chris, Thank you very much. That is a good idea. I've added it to the last slide in the attached deck. By the way, since there are only 10 minutes for the update, I suggest you may wish to skip quickly through the background slides and move to the questions on which the PDP WG is seeking input. I think it's good to have the background slides there for people to reference, however. Best regards, Julie From: , Chris Date: Wednesday, February 26, 2014 11:09 AM To: Julie Hedlund , Ching Chiao Cc: "gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org" Subject: RE: Attachment re: Slides for GNSO Update Tomorrow Dear Julie, The only substantial change I can see is that it would be good to have the URL of the wiki in there, as anyone interested could use that to see what we?re doing including the letters we?ve received (without listening to all the calls). Regards, Chris. -- Research Associate in Linguistic Computing, Centre for Digital Humanities, UCL, Gower St, London WC1E 6BT Tel +44 20 7679 1599 (int 31599) ucl.ac.uk/dis/people/chrisdillon From: Julie Hedlund [mailto:julie.hedlund at icann.org] Sent: 26 February 2014 15:57 To: Dillon, Chris; Ching Chiao Cc: gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org Subject: Attachment re: Slides for GNSO Update Tomorrow Now with the attachment! Julie From: Julie Hedlund Date: Wednesday, February 26, 2014 10:52 AM To: "Dillon, Chris" , Ching Chiao Cc: "gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org" Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] Slides for GNSO Update Tomorrow Chris, Here are some slides that Lars and I have developed that you can use for the update tomorrow at the GNSO Council meeting. Please let me know ASAP if you have any changes. Thank you, Julie Julie Hedlund, Director, SSAC Support -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Update Slides for GNSO Council Meeting 27 Feb 2014.ppt Type: application/vnd.ms-powerpoint Size: 1683968 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 5041 bytes Desc: not available URL: From c.dillon at ucl.ac.uk Wed Feb 26 18:05:39 2014 From: c.dillon at ucl.ac.uk (Dillon, Chris) Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2014 18:05:39 +0000 Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] Re: Attachment re: Slides for GNSO Update Tomorrow Message-ID: Dear Julie, Thank you for adding the edit and also for the time management tip - 10 mins is a challenge. Regards, Chris. -- Research Associate in Linguistic Computing, Centre for Digital Humanities, UCL, Gower St, London WC1E 6BT Tel +44 20 7679 1599 (int 31599) ucl.ac.uk/dis/people/chrisdillon From: Julie Hedlund > Date: Wednesday, 26 February 2014 16:21 To: Chris Dillon >, Ching Chiao > Cc: "gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org" > Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] Re: Attachment re: Slides for GNSO Update Tomorrow Dear Chris, Thank you very much. That is a good idea. I've added it to the last slide in the attached deck. By the way, since there are only 10 minutes for the update, I suggest you may wish to skip quickly through the background slides and move to the questions on which the PDP WG is seeking input. I think it's good to have the background slides there for people to reference, however. Best regards, Julie From: , Chris > Date: Wednesday, February 26, 2014 11:09 AM To: Julie Hedlund >, Ching Chiao > Cc: "gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org" > Subject: RE: Attachment re: Slides for GNSO Update Tomorrow Dear Julie, The only substantial change I can see is that it would be good to have the URL of the wiki in there, as anyone interested could use that to see what we're doing including the letters we've received (without listening to all the calls). Regards, Chris. -- Research Associate in Linguistic Computing, Centre for Digital Humanities, UCL, Gower St, London WC1E 6BT Tel +44 20 7679 1599 (int 31599) ucl.ac.uk/dis/people/chrisdillon From: Julie Hedlund [mailto:julie.hedlund at icann.org] Sent: 26 February 2014 15:57 To: Dillon, Chris; Ching Chiao Cc: gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org Subject: Attachment re: Slides for GNSO Update Tomorrow Now with the attachment! Julie From: Julie Hedlund > Date: Wednesday, February 26, 2014 10:52 AM To: "Dillon, Chris" >, Ching Chiao > Cc: "gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org" > Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] Slides for GNSO Update Tomorrow Chris, Here are some slides that Lars and I have developed that you can use for the update tomorrow at the GNSO Council meeting. Please let me know ASAP if you have any changes. Thank you, Julie Julie Hedlund, Director, SSAC Support -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jen at registry.asia Thu Feb 27 04:18:41 2014 From: jen at registry.asia (Jennifer Chung) Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2014 23:18:41 -0500 Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] RE: [ntfy-gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] REMINDER: Meeting invitation: Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information PDP Working Group Thursday 27 February 2014 14:00 UTC References: Message-ID: <00e401cf3373$004dad60$00e90820$@registry.asia> Dear Colleagues, Apologies to all - I will not be able to attend tomorrow?s call as I will be in transit. Best Regards, Jennifer Chung From: owner-ntfy-gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org [mailto:owner-ntfy-gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org] On Behalf Of Terri Agnew Sent: Tuesday, February 25, 2014 4:51 PM To: ntfy-gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org Cc: gnso-secs at icann.org Subject: [ntfy-gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] REMINDER: Meeting invitation: Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information PDP Working Group Thursday 27 February 2014 14:00 UTC Dear All, The next Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information PDP Working Group teleconference is scheduled for Thursday 27th February 2014 at 1400 UTC 06:00 PST, 09:00 EST, 14:00 London, 15:00 CEST For other places see: http://tinyurl.com/kvadmpj Adobe Connect WITH AUDIO enabled: http://icann.adobeconnect.com/gnsocontactinfopdpwg/ Mailing list archives: http://forum.icann.org/lists/gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg/ Wiki page: https://community.icann.org/x/FTR-Ag The recordings and transcriptions of the calls are posted on the GNSO Master Calendar page: http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/ The dial-in details are below - please let me know if you require a dial-out. _____________________________________________________________________ Participant passcode: CONTACT Dial in numbers: Country Toll Numbers Freephone/ Toll Free Number ARGENTINA 0800-777-0519 AUSTRALIA ADELAIDE: 61-8-8121-4842 1-800-657-260 AUSTRALIA BRISBANE: 61-7-3102-0944 1-800-657-260 AUSTRALIA CANBERRA: 61-2-6100-1944 1-800-657-260 AUSTRALIA MELBOURNE: 61-3-9010-7713 1-800-657-260 AUSTRALIA PERTH: 61-8-9467-5223 1-800-657-260 AUSTRALIA SYDNEY: 61-2-8205-8129 1-800-657-260 AUSTRIA 43-1-92-81-113 0800-005-259 BELGIUM 32-2-400-9861 0800-3-8795 BRAZIL 55-11-3958-0779 0800-7610651 CHILE 1230-020-2863 CHINA CHINA A: 86-400-810-4789 10800-712-1670 CHINA CHINA B: 86-400-810-4789 10800-120-1670 COLOMBIA 01800-9-156474 CROATIA 080-08-06-309 CZECH REPUBLIC 420-2-25-98-56-64 800-700-177 DENMARK 45-7014-0284 8088-8324 ESTONIA 800-011-1093 FINLAND 358-9-5424-7162 0-800-9-14610 FRANCE LYON: 33-4-26-69-12-85 080-511-1496 FRANCE MARSEILLE: 33-4-86-06-00-85 080-511-1496 FRANCE PARIS: 33-1-70-70-60-72 080-511-1496 GERMANY 49-69-2222-20362 0800-664-4247 GREECE 30-80-1-100-0687 00800-12-7312 HONG KONG 852-3001-3863 800-962-856 HUNGARY 36-1-700-8856 06-800-12755 INDIA BANGALORE: 91-80-61275204 INDIA MUMBAI: 91-22-61501629 INDIA INDIA A: 000-800-852-1268 INDIA INDIA B: 000-800-001-6305 INDIA INDIA C: 1800-300-00491 INDONESIA 001-803-011-3982 IRELAND 353-1-246-7646 1800-992-368 ISRAEL 1-80-9216162 ITALY MILAN: 39-02-3600-6007 800-986-383 ITALY ROME: 39-06-8751-6018 800-986-383 ITALY TORINO: 39-011-510-0118 800-986-383 JAPAN OSAKA: 81-6-7739-4799 0066-33-132439 JAPAN TOKYO: 81-3-5539-5191 0066-33-132439 LATVIA 8000-3185 LUXEMBOURG 352-27-000-1364 8002-9246 MALAYSIA 1-800-81-3065 MEXICO GUADALAJARA (JAL): 52-33-3208-7310 001-866-376-9696 MEXICO MEXICO CITY: 52-55-5062-9110 001-866-376-9696 MEXICO MONTERREY: 52-81-2482-0610 001-866-376-9696 NETHERLANDS 31-20-718-8588 0800-023-4378 NEW ZEALAND 64-9-970-4771 0800-447-722 NORWAY 47-21-590-062 800-15157 PANAMA 011-001-800-5072065 PERU 0800-53713 PHILIPPINES 63-2-858-3716 1800-111-42453 POLAND 00-800-1212572 PORTUGAL 8008-14052 ROMANIA 40-31-630-01-79 RUSSIA 8-10-8002-0144011 SAUDI ARABIA 800-8-110087 SINGAPORE 65-6883-9230 800-120-4663 SLOVAK REPUBLIC 421-2-322-422-25 0800-002066 SLOVENIA 0-800-81310 SOUTH AFRICA 080-09-80414 SOUTH KOREA 82-2-6744-1083 00798-14800-7352 SPAIN 34-91-414-25-33 800-300-053 SWEDEN 46-8-566-19-348 0200-884-622 SWITZERLAND 41-44-580-6398 0800-120-032 TAIWAN 886-2-2795-7379 00801-137-797 THAILAND 001-800-1206-66056 TURKEY 00-800-151-0516 UNITED ARAB EMIRATES 8000-35702370 UNITED KINGDOM BIRMINGHAM: 44-121-210-9025 0808-238-6029 UNITED KINGDOM GLASGOW: 44-141-202-3225 0808-238-6029 UNITED KINGDOM LEEDS: 44-113-301-2125 0808-238-6029 UNITED KINGDOM LONDON: 44-20-7108-6370 0808-238-6029 UNITED KINGDOM MANCHESTER: 44-161-601-1425 0808-238-6029 URUGUAY 000-413-598-3421 USA 1-517-345-9004 866-692-5726 VENEZUELA 0800-1-00-3702 Thank you. Kind regards, Terri Agnew For GNSO Secretariat -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From nathalie.peregrine at icann.org Thu Feb 27 07:36:53 2014 From: nathalie.peregrine at icann.org (Nathalie Peregrine) Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2014 23:36:53 -0800 Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] RE: [ntfy-gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] REMINDER: Meeting invitation: Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information PDP Working Group Thursday 27 February 2014 14:00 UTC In-Reply-To: <00e401cf3373$004dad60$00e90820$@registry.asia> References: <00e401cf3373$004dad60$00e90820$@registry.asia> Message-ID: Dear Jennifer, Thank you for this, your apology has been noted. Kindest regards Nathalie From: owner-gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org [mailto:owner-gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org] On Behalf Of Jennifer Chung Sent: Thursday, February 27, 2014 5:19 AM To: gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org Cc: Glen de Saint G?ry Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] RE: [ntfy-gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] REMINDER: Meeting invitation: Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information PDP Working Group Thursday 27 February 2014 14:00 UTC Dear Colleagues, Apologies to all - I will not be able to attend tomorrow?s call as I will be in transit. Best Regards, Jennifer Chung From: owner-ntfy-gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org [mailto:owner-ntfy-gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org] On Behalf Of Terri Agnew Sent: Tuesday, February 25, 2014 4:51 PM To: ntfy-gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org Cc: gnso-secs at icann.org Subject: [ntfy-gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] REMINDER: Meeting invitation: Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information PDP Working Group Thursday 27 February 2014 14:00 UTC Dear All, The next Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information PDP Working Group teleconference is scheduled for Thursday 27th February 2014 at 1400 UTC 06:00 PST, 09:00 EST, 14:00 London, 15:00 CEST For other places see: http://tinyurl.com/kvadmpj Adobe Connect WITH AUDIO enabled: http://icann.adobeconnect.com/gnsocontactinfopdpwg/ Mailing list archives: http://forum.icann.org/lists/gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg/ Wiki page: https://community.icann.org/x/FTR-Ag The recordings and transcriptions of the calls are posted on the GNSO Master Calendar page: http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/ The dial-in details are below - please let me know if you require a dial-out. _____________________________________________________________________ Participant passcode: CONTACT Dial in numbers: Country Toll Numbers Freephone/ Toll Free Number ARGENTINA 0800-777-0519 AUSTRALIA ADELAIDE: 61-8-8121-4842 1-800-657-260 AUSTRALIA BRISBANE: 61-7-3102-0944 1-800-657-260 AUSTRALIA CANBERRA: 61-2-6100-1944 1-800-657-260 AUSTRALIA MELBOURNE: 61-3-9010-7713 1-800-657-260 AUSTRALIA PERTH: 61-8-9467-5223 1-800-657-260 AUSTRALIA SYDNEY: 61-2-8205-8129 1-800-657-260 AUSTRIA 43-1-92-81-113 0800-005-259 BELGIUM 32-2-400-9861 0800-3-8795 BRAZIL 55-11-3958-0779 0800-7610651 CHILE 1230-020-2863 CHINA CHINA A: 86-400-810-4789 10800-712-1670 CHINA CHINA B: 86-400-810-4789 10800-120-1670 COLOMBIA 01800-9-156474 CROATIA 080-08-06-309 CZECH REPUBLIC 420-2-25-98-56-64 800-700-177 DENMARK 45-7014-0284 8088-8324 ESTONIA 800-011-1093 FINLAND 358-9-5424-7162 0-800-9-14610 FRANCE LYON: 33-4-26-69-12-85 080-511-1496 FRANCE MARSEILLE: 33-4-86-06-00-85 080-511-1496 FRANCE PARIS: 33-1-70-70-60-72 080-511-1496 GERMANY 49-69-2222-20362 0800-664-4247 GREECE 30-80-1-100-0687 00800-12-7312 HONG KONG 852-3001-3863 800-962-856 HUNGARY 36-1-700-8856 06-800-12755 INDIA BANGALORE: 91-80-61275204 INDIA MUMBAI: 91-22-61501629 INDIA INDIA A: 000-800-852-1268 INDIA INDIA B: 000-800-001-6305 INDIA INDIA C: 1800-300-00491 INDONESIA 001-803-011-3982 IRELAND 353-1-246-7646 1800-992-368 ISRAEL 1-80-9216162 ITALY MILAN: 39-02-3600-6007 800-986-383 ITALY ROME: 39-06-8751-6018 800-986-383 ITALY TORINO: 39-011-510-0118 800-986-383 JAPAN OSAKA: 81-6-7739-4799 0066-33-132439 JAPAN TOKYO: 81-3-5539-5191 0066-33-132439 LATVIA 8000-3185 LUXEMBOURG 352-27-000-1364 8002-9246 MALAYSIA 1-800-81-3065 MEXICO GUADALAJARA (JAL): 52-33-3208-7310 001-866-376-9696 MEXICO MEXICO CITY: 52-55-5062-9110 001-866-376-9696 MEXICO MONTERREY: 52-81-2482-0610 001-866-376-9696 NETHERLANDS 31-20-718-8588 0800-023-4378 NEW ZEALAND 64-9-970-4771 0800-447-722 NORWAY 47-21-590-062 800-15157 PANAMA 011-001-800-5072065 PERU 0800-53713 PHILIPPINES 63-2-858-3716 1800-111-42453 POLAND 00-800-1212572 PORTUGAL 8008-14052 ROMANIA 40-31-630-01-79 RUSSIA 8-10-8002-0144011 SAUDI ARABIA 800-8-110087 SINGAPORE 65-6883-9230 800-120-4663 SLOVAK REPUBLIC 421-2-322-422-25 0800-002066 SLOVENIA 0-800-81310 SOUTH AFRICA 080-09-80414 SOUTH KOREA 82-2-6744-1083 00798-14800-7352 SPAIN 34-91-414-25-33 800-300-053 SWEDEN 46-8-566-19-348 0200-884-622 SWITZERLAND 41-44-580-6398 0800-120-032 TAIWAN 886-2-2795-7379 00801-137-797 THAILAND 001-800-1206-66056 TURKEY 00-800-151-0516 UNITED ARAB EMIRATES 8000-35702370 UNITED KINGDOM BIRMINGHAM: 44-121-210-9025 0808-238-6029 UNITED KINGDOM GLASGOW: 44-141-202-3225 0808-238-6029 UNITED KINGDOM LEEDS: 44-113-301-2125 0808-238-6029 UNITED KINGDOM LONDON: 44-20-7108-6370 0808-238-6029 UNITED KINGDOM MANCHESTER: 44-161-601-1425 0808-238-6029 URUGUAY 000-413-598-3421 USA 1-517-345-9004 866-692-5726 VENEZUELA 0800-1-00-3702 Thank you. Kind regards, Terri Agnew For GNSO Secretariat -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 5457 bytes Desc: not available URL: From wolf-ulrich.knoben at t-online.de Thu Feb 27 09:58:39 2014 From: wolf-ulrich.knoben at t-online.de (WUKnoben) Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2014 10:58:39 +0100 Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] FW: Request for input In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <8EF67D255A8F47E29D9C03F358D58FC1@WUKPC> >From my GNSO council experience with the GAC I didn?t expect a different answer ? I?m even more happy having received any GAC answer. If there is a F2F WG meeting planned in Singapore I?d suggest to invite the GAC members who have been asked to answer the questionnaire. I?m really sorry that today I have to miss the call again. My apologies! It?s not because of the carnaval season in our region. Best regards Wolf-Ulrich From: Lars Hoffmann Sent: Monday, February 24, 2014 3:09 PM To: gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] FW: Request for input Dear Working Group members, Please find below the response from Olof Nordling, ICANN Senior Director GAC Relations, with regard to the WG's request to meet with the GAC in Singapore. Spoiler alert: It's not good news. It might be useful at this stage for the Chairs (or staff if you wish so) to re-send the input request to the individual GAC members that were contacted and have not yet replied as this might be at this stage the most promising way to gather at least some input from some of the GAC members. Best wishes, Lars From: Olof Nordling Date: Monday, February 24, 2014 2:59 PM To: Lars Hoffmann Cc: "gacsec at gac.icann.org" , Julie Hedlund Subject: RE: Request for input Dear Lars, Thank you for your kind request from the WG on Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information for input from the GAC and for a meeting in Singapore. This has been brought to the GAC Chair?s attention. On her behalf I must inform you that, in view of the time available and the current number of priority matters to address by the GAC where a joint position is essential, any joint response by the GAC to the questions raised cannot realistically be foreseen. Nor does the time allow for a separate meeting with the WG in Singapore. Very best regards Olof -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From aelsadr at egyptig.org Thu Feb 27 10:05:09 2014 From: aelsadr at egyptig.org (Amr Elsadr) Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2014 11:05:09 +0100 Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] RE: [ntfy-gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] REMINDER: Meeting invitation: Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information PDP Working Group Thursday 27 February 2014 14:00 UTC In-Reply-To: References: <00e401cf3373$004dad60$00e90820$@registry.asia> Message-ID: <97D1BA2D-46B3-4145-A841-BE9695E15C68@egyptig.org> Hi, I might not be able to make today's call as well. I will try to, but have another commitment that may last into the hour of our scheduled call. Thanks. Amr Sent from mobile > On Feb 27, 2014, at 8:36 AM, Nathalie Peregrine wrote: > > Dear Jennifer, > > Thank you for this, your apology has been noted. > > Kindest regards > > Nathalie > > From: owner-gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org [mailto:owner-gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org] On Behalf Of Jennifer Chung > Sent: Thursday, February 27, 2014 5:19 AM > To: gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org > Cc: Glen de Saint G?ry > Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] RE: [ntfy-gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] REMINDER: Meeting invitation: Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information PDP Working Group Thursday 27 February 2014 14:00 UTC > > Dear Colleagues, > > Apologies to all - I will not be able to attend tomorrow?s call as I will be in transit. > > Best Regards, > > Jennifer Chung > > > From: owner-ntfy-gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org [mailto:owner-ntfy-gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org] On Behalf Of Terri Agnew > Sent: Tuesday, February 25, 2014 4:51 PM > To: ntfy-gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org > Cc: gnso-secs at icann.org > Subject: [ntfy-gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] REMINDER: Meeting invitation: Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information PDP Working Group Thursday 27 February 2014 14:00 UTC > > > Dear All, > > The next Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information PDP Working Group teleconference is scheduled for Thursday 27th February 2014 at 1400 UTC > 06:00 PST, 09:00 EST, 14:00 London, 15:00 CEST > For other places see: http://tinyurl.com/kvadmpj > > > Adobe Connect WITH AUDIO enabled: > http://icann.adobeconnect.com/gnsocontactinfopdpwg/ > > > Mailing list archives: > http://forum.icann.org/lists/gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg/ > > Wiki page: > https://community.icann.org/x/FTR-Ag > > The recordings and transcriptions of the calls are posted on the GNSO Master Calendar page: > http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/ > > > The dial-in details are below - please let me know if you require a dial-out. > _____________________________________________________________________ > > Participant passcode: CONTACT > > Dial in numbers: > Country > > Toll Numbers > Freephone/ > Toll Free Number > > > > > > ARGENTINA > > > 0800-777-0519 > AUSTRALIA > ADELAIDE: > 61-8-8121-4842 > 1-800-657-260 > AUSTRALIA > BRISBANE: > 61-7-3102-0944 > 1-800-657-260 > AUSTRALIA > CANBERRA: > 61-2-6100-1944 > 1-800-657-260 > AUSTRALIA > MELBOURNE: > 61-3-9010-7713 > 1-800-657-260 > AUSTRALIA > PERTH: > 61-8-9467-5223 > 1-800-657-260 > AUSTRALIA > SYDNEY: > 61-2-8205-8129 > 1-800-657-260 > AUSTRIA > > 43-1-92-81-113 > 0800-005-259 > BELGIUM > > 32-2-400-9861 > 0800-3-8795 > BRAZIL > > 55-11-3958-0779 > 0800-7610651 > CHILE > > > 1230-020-2863 > CHINA > CHINA A: > 86-400-810-4789 > 10800-712-1670 > CHINA > CHINA B: > 86-400-810-4789 > 10800-120-1670 > COLOMBIA > > > 01800-9-156474 > CROATIA > > > 080-08-06-309 > CZECH REPUBLIC > > 420-2-25-98-56-64 > 800-700-177 > DENMARK > > 45-7014-0284 > 8088-8324 > ESTONIA > > > 800-011-1093 > FINLAND > > 358-9-5424-7162 > 0-800-9-14610 > FRANCE > LYON: > 33-4-26-69-12-85 > 080-511-1496 > FRANCE > MARSEILLE: > 33-4-86-06-00-85 > 080-511-1496 > FRANCE > PARIS: > 33-1-70-70-60-72 > 080-511-1496 > GERMANY > > 49-69-2222-20362 > 0800-664-4247 > GREECE > > 30-80-1-100-0687 > 00800-12-7312 > HONG KONG > > 852-3001-3863 > 800-962-856 > HUNGARY > > 36-1-700-8856 > 06-800-12755 > INDIA > BANGALORE: > 91-80-61275204 > > INDIA > MUMBAI: > 91-22-61501629 > > INDIA > INDIA A: > > 000-800-852-1268 > INDIA > INDIA B: > > 000-800-001-6305 > INDIA > INDIA C: > > 1800-300-00491 > INDONESIA > > > 001-803-011-3982 > IRELAND > > 353-1-246-7646 > 1800-992-368 > ISRAEL > > > 1-80-9216162 > ITALY > MILAN: > 39-02-3600-6007 > 800-986-383 > ITALY > ROME: > 39-06-8751-6018 > 800-986-383 > ITALY > TORINO: > 39-011-510-0118 > 800-986-383 > JAPAN > OSAKA: > 81-6-7739-4799 > 0066-33-132439 > JAPAN > TOKYO: > 81-3-5539-5191 > 0066-33-132439 > LATVIA > > > 8000-3185 > LUXEMBOURG > > 352-27-000-1364 > 8002-9246 > MALAYSIA > > > 1-800-81-3065 > MEXICO > GUADALAJARA (JAL): > 52-33-3208-7310 > 001-866-376-9696 > MEXICO > MEXICO CITY: > 52-55-5062-9110 > 001-866-376-9696 > MEXICO > MONTERREY: > 52-81-2482-0610 > 001-866-376-9696 > NETHERLANDS > > 31-20-718-8588 > 0800-023-4378 > NEW ZEALAND > > 64-9-970-4771 > 0800-447-722 > NORWAY > > 47-21-590-062 > 800-15157 > PANAMA > > > 011-001-800-5072065 > PERU > > > 0800-53713 > PHILIPPINES > > 63-2-858-3716 > 1800-111-42453 > POLAND > > > 00-800-1212572 > PORTUGAL > > > 8008-14052 > ROMANIA > > 40-31-630-01-79 > > RUSSIA > > > 8-10-8002-0144011 > SAUDI ARABIA > > > 800-8-110087 > SINGAPORE > > 65-6883-9230 > 800-120-4663 > SLOVAK REPUBLIC > > 421-2-322-422-25 > 0800-002066 > SLOVENIA > > > 0-800-81310 > SOUTH AFRICA > > > 080-09-80414 > SOUTH KOREA > > 82-2-6744-1083 > 00798-14800-7352 > SPAIN > > 34-91-414-25-33 > 800-300-053 > SWEDEN > > 46-8-566-19-348 > 0200-884-622 > SWITZERLAND > > 41-44-580-6398 > 0800-120-032 > TAIWAN > > 886-2-2795-7379 > 00801-137-797 > THAILAND > > > 001-800-1206-66056 > TURKEY > > > 00-800-151-0516 > UNITED ARAB EMIRATES > > > 8000-35702370 > UNITED KINGDOM > BIRMINGHAM: > 44-121-210-9025 > 0808-238-6029 > UNITED KINGDOM > GLASGOW: > 44-141-202-3225 > 0808-238-6029 > UNITED KINGDOM > LEEDS: > 44-113-301-2125 > 0808-238-6029 > UNITED KINGDOM > LONDON: > 44-20-7108-6370 > 0808-238-6029 > UNITED KINGDOM > MANCHESTER: > 44-161-601-1425 > 0808-238-6029 > URUGUAY > > > 000-413-598-3421 > USA > > 1-517-345-9004 > 866-692-5726 > VENEZUELA > > > 0800-1-00-3702 > > > > > Thank you. > Kind regards, > Terri Agnew > For GNSO Secretariat > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From wolf-ulrich.knoben at t-online.de Thu Feb 27 10:12:36 2014 From: wolf-ulrich.knoben at t-online.de (WUKnoben) Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2014 11:12:36 +0100 Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] TR: Input Request:Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information Charter Questions In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <68F4538237CB44B8B7BC2F59F461371B@WUKPC> I think, these answers are very helpful to understand their needs. Best regards Wolf-Ulrich From: Glen de Saint G?ry Sent: Tuesday, February 25, 2014 10:45 AM To: gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] TR: Input Request:Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information Charter Questions FYI De : Wanawit Ahkuputra Envoy? : mardi 25 f?vrier 2014 10:22 ? : Glen de Saint G?ry Cc : gnso-secs at icann.org; Lars Hoffmann; GAC Secretariat; Hugh Thaweesak Koanantakool; Pitinan Objet : Re: Input Request:Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information Charter Questions Dear GNSO Secretariat; Reference made to your letter on 5 February 2014: Input Request: Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information Charter Questions. On the role of our official position as the GAC Representative of Thailand to ICANN and Deputy Executive Director of Electronic Transaction Development Agency, Ministry of Information and Technology, Royal Thai Government; and also the fact that we had been participated as individual memberer in Charter Drafting Team of Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information PDP working group. We would like to give some thoughts and express our opinions on this issue for the Working Group as follow: Input Request Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information Charter Questions Whether it is desirable to translate contact information to a single common language or transliterate contact information to a single common script. Reference from http://www.academia.edu/3830294/English_as_a_Lingua_Franca_in_Thailand_Characterisations_and_Implications ? Given that Thailand does not have a history of colonisation by the British and that English is not an official language in the country, Thailand is typically classified as an ?expanding circle? country (Kachru, 2005) in which English is used as a means of intercultural communication. Importantly such a classification also entails that Thailand is a norm dependent country which does not have its own variety of English and which does not use English for intra cultural communication. While the extent to which this classification of English in Thailand will be questioned in this paper, the expanding circle tag serves as a useful, if simplified, means for distinguishing Thailand from countries which use English as a first language, or as an official second language. The linguistic landscape of Thailand is often portrayed as monolingual and highly homogenous with government sources claiming that almost 100% of the population speak standard Thai (National Identity Board, 2000). As might be expected this hides a more complex linguistic picture. Other languages including Chinese, Malay, Lao, and Khmer are also spoken by minority groups (National Identity Board, 2000; Foley, 2005) and the majority of the population use one of the four regional dialects of Thai rather than standard Thai (Simpson and Thammasathien 2007). Nevertheless, given the relatively minor status given to other languages in the country, English forms the ?de facto? second language of Thailand. There are a number of domains in which English is widely used in Thailand including: as a compulsory subject in school and in higher education, as a medium of instruction in international education programs, as the language of international organisations and conferences (including ASEAN and ASEAN +3), for international business transactions, tourism, the internet, global advertising, scientific and technology transfer, media (including imported films and music), international safety and international law(Wongsatorn et al 1996; 2003; Foley, 2005)? >From the reference, even English has given the relatively minor status and not being used for intracultural communication, English, however, is the 'de facto' for intercultural communication and international business transactions including the internet. Therefore, It is quite clear that it is desirable to translate contact information to a single common language or transliterate contact information to a single common script and preferable in English. What exactly the benefits to the community are of translating and/or transliterating contact information, especially in light of the costs that may be connected to translation and/or transliteration? As the result of using single official language system, most of the contact information used is in Thai and the translating and/or transliterating of contact information form Thai to English has been loosely handling by applicants or data owners. Several government entities handling English contact information by accepting the information given by data owners per se, therefore, it is possible that the English contact information is inconsistent. In other cases which government bodies need to provide English contact information such as the geographical name of a street. There are several related standards such as 'Romanization' by Royal Institute, 'the list of exception or reserved words' by geographical name committee. The result of adopting these standards appears in the list of geographical names for places in Thailand in UNGEGN (United Nations Group of Experts on Geographical Names). However, the standards are not widely known and it is not mandatory to adopt. Therefore, it is possible that each government entity could use different method for translation and/or transliteration. >From the stated current condition, if the contact information needs validation, it could be a burden trying to figure out the suitable reference, if any. We have no objection with the approach from the Translation and Transliteration of Whois Contact Information DPD Working Group that this issue is tightly related to the role of government. Currently we are under the consideration to provide the infrastructure for translation and/or transliteration as the single registry system. This approach could benefit as in the most accurate reference for contact information in English and the validation could be handled at the most economic cost. Should translation and/or transliteration of contact information be mandatory for all gTLDs? We support that it should be mandatory. From the statistic, around one-third of the domain names in Thailand registered with ccTLD (.th) and anther two-third of the names are gTLD, which is open to all ICANN's registrars. Many cases that Thai domain owner registers for a domain name from foreign registrar, as the nature of internet is borderless. Not having translation and/or transliteration mandatory for all gTLD would create discrimination to registries and registrars. However to minimize the impact to the cost bearer, the translation and/or transliteration of local language to common language should be established in each country. And this methodology should be accredited by ICANN. Should translation and/or transliteration of contact information be mandatory for all registrants or only those based in certain countries and/or using specific non-ASCII scripts? It is unarguable that the translation and/or transliteration should be mandatory for those cased based in non-ASCII script countries. So it is possible that the non-ASCII script countries have higher priority to catalyst this issue. What impact will translation/transliteration of contact information have on the WHOIS validation as set out under the 2013 Registrar Accreditation Agreement? Reference to section: Whois Accuracy Program Specification ?1(e), "Validate that all postal address fields are consistent across fields (for example: street exists in city, city exists in state/province, city matches postal code) where such information is technically and commercially feaible for the applicable country or territory." This could draw to the question of who would make the decision if a country or territory is technically and commercially feasible and what would be the decision making criteria. As the validation of all postal address both newly registered and the backlog could be costly, it might turn out that not many territories or countries is feasible to comply. Reference to section: Whois Accuracy Program Specification ?1(f) and ?2 "if Registrar does not receive an affirmative response from the Account Holder, Registrar shall verify the applicable contact information manually" It occurs in Thailand that more than half of the domain name owners using gTLD and it is possible to choose foreign Registrars. The manual verification might occur when registrar does not receive an affirmative response via email or phone. Even it is not specified the method, this manual verification could costly for Registrar when it is cross-border verification. This also emphasizes the need of single point of registration system for common language/script of contact information for each country. To minimize any cost that might occur during verification, and the more important point is to provide the eligible contact address information. When should any new policy relating to translation and transliteration of contact information come into effect? (Reference: http://docs.apwg.org/reports/APWG_GlobaTolPhishingSurvey_1H2013.pdf) Thailand has been, disappointedly, in the top-5 of phishing for the past several years. From our view, we see that having translation and transliteration pocily in place would be one of the phishing mitigations as the verified contact information would be the important eligible linkage between internet identities to the real person. We encourage that this policy should come into effect at the earliest possible timeline. Do you have suggestions concerning the basic principles to guide the cost burden discussion, such as the free of charge provision of the information, demand-oriented cost etc.? In particular, the PDP WG is tasked with determining who should decide who should bear the burden translating contact information to a single common language or transliterating contact information to a single common script. This question relates to the concern expressed by the Internationalized Registration Data Working Group (IRD-WG) in its report that there are costs associated with providing translation and transliteration of contact information. For example, if a policy development process (PDP) determined that the registrar must translate or transliterate contact information, this policy would place a cost burden on the registrar. In compliance with the "Proposal by THAILAND?s Government Advisory Committee (GAC)" submitted into the PDP working group earlier, it is government role to facilitate establishment of the infrastructure for translation/transliteration of contact information. Once the infrastructure is in place, the cost of translation/transliteration and the cost of validation should be economic. This eligible registered contact address information will also be applicable for many other applications for data owner, not limited to ICANN whois database but it could also benefit the e-invoice and all electronic transaction services. We would suggest considering demand-oriented approach for this matter. In this case, the demand to translate/transliterate and maintain contact address information is belong to the data owners or registrants, and the demand for address validation could be from registrars. Therefore, the cost of conversion from local language into common language should belong to registrants and the cost for validation should belong to registrars. We are looking forward to gather for a face-to-face meeting during the ICANN Meeting in Singapore. Regards Mr. Wanawit Ahkuputra Deputy Executive Director ETDA Electronic Transactions Development Agency (Public Organization) MICT Ministry of Information and Communication Technology The Government Complex Commemorating His Majesty the King's 80th Birthday Anniversary 120 M.3 Ratthaprasasanabhakti Building (building B), 7th floor, Chaengwattana Rd., Thung Song Hong, Laksi Bangkok 10210, THAILAND Tel : +66 2142 1159 Fax. +66 2143 8071 Mobile +669 301 8818 E-Mail: wanawit at etda.or.th On Feb 5, 2557 BE, at 5:35 AM, Glen de Saint G?ry wrote: Dear GAC representative, dear Thaweesak As you may be aware, the GNSO Council recently initiated a Policy Development Process (PDP) on the Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information; the relevant Issue Report can be found here. A more detailed background is available online on the Working Group?s Wiki where you can also consult the Charter. As part of its efforts to obtain broad input from the ICANN Community at an early stage and we have written to Ms Heather Dryden, Chair of the GAC, already to solicit feedback from the GAC where possible. However, as the matter of translating and/or transliteration of Contact information will be of special significance for countries that do not use Latin Scripts, we thought it useful to contact individual GAC representatives. Please note that we do not seek an official position on this matter but rather would welcome any thoughts and/or experiences you might have and what the best practice might be or ought to be in your country on this matter. An informal response to any of the questions below or any other thoughts you might have on the issue of translation and transliteration of Contact Information would be very much appreciated. Please send these to the GNSO Secretariat (gnso.secretariat at gnso.icann.org) who will forward these to the Working Group; ideally by Tuesday 11 March 2014. Finally, our Working Group is planning to gather for a face-to-face meeting during the forthcoming ICANN Meeting in Singapore. We would be delighted if you could join our discussions should you be in Singapore at the time. We will renew this invitation closer to the time when we have finalized our meeting time and agenda. Many thanks and best wishes, Chris Dillon (Co-Chair) Rudi Vansnick (Co-Chair) Input Request Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information Charter Questions Whether it is desirable to translate contact information to a single common language or transliterate contact information to a single common script. What exactly the benefits to the community are of translating and/or transliterating contact information, especially in light of the costs that may be connected to translation and/or transliteration? Should translation and/or transliteration of contact information be mandatory for all gTLDs? Should translation and/or transliteration of contact information be mandatory for all registrants or only those based in certain countries and/or using specific non-ASCII scripts? What impact will translation/transliteration of contact information have on the WHOIS validation as set out under the 2013 Registrar Accreditation Agreement? When should any new policy relating to translation and transliteration of contact information come into effect? Do you have suggestions concerning the basic principles to guide the cost burden discussion, such as the free of charge provision of the information, demand-oriented cost etc.? In particular, the PDP WG is tasked with determining who should decide who should bear the burden translating contact information to a single common language or transliterating contact information to a single common script. This question relates to the concern expressed by the Internationalized Registration Data Working Group (IRD-WG) in its report that there are costs associated with providing translation and transliteration of contact information. For example, if a policy development process (PDP) determined that the registrar must translate or transliterate contact information, this policy would place a cost burden on the registrar. Glen de Saint G?ry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat at gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From wolf-ulrich.knoben at t-online.de Thu Feb 27 10:42:39 2014 From: wolf-ulrich.knoben at t-online.de (WUKnoben) Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2014 11:42:39 +0100 Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] RE: Input Request:Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information Charter Questions In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: As to question #1 the answer of the Thailand GAC member provides good input re the issues behind. One common language and one common script would be comfortable if ? at least for the majority of cases ? non-ambiguity could be guaranteed. Are there experts for the different languages/scripts to answer this question? There may be additional criteria to be looked at. Best regards Wolf-Ulrich From: Dillon, Chris Sent: Tuesday, February 25, 2014 4:19 PM To: gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] RE: Input Request:Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information Charter Questions Dear colleagues, I have added this Thai letter to https://community.icann.org/display/tatcipdp/List+of+correspondence+received . Please have a critical look at it and make any comments either before the meeting on this list or during agenda point 4: https://community.icann.org/display/tatcipdp/27+February+2014 I have added the two main questions (and sub-questions) from the charter for your convenience and for discussion under agenda point 5. We will be considering the prioritization of the questions. Breaking difficult questions into several easier ones is only one possible working methodology and we are open to other approaches. Again, please make any comments either before the meeting or during agenda point 6. Although at least one of the Study for the Submission and Display of Internationalized Contact Data?s surveys has been opened, they will be raised under AOB for any comments. Regards, Chris. -- Research Associate in Linguistic Computing, Centre for Digital Humanities, UCL, Gower St, London WC1E 6BT Tel +44 20 7679 1599 (int 31599) ucl.ac.uk/dis/people/chrisdillon From: owner-gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org [mailto:owner-gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org] On Behalf Of Glen de Saint G?ry Sent: 25 February 2014 09:46 To: gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] TR: Input Request:Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information Charter Questions FYI De : Wanawit Ahkuputra Envoy? : mardi 25 f?vrier 2014 10:22 ? : Glen de Saint G?ry Cc : gnso-secs at icann.org; Lars Hoffmann; GAC Secretariat; Hugh Thaweesak Koanantakool; Pitinan Objet : Re: Input Request:Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information Charter Questions Dear GNSO Secretariat; Reference made to your letter on 5 February 2014: Input Request: Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information Charter Questions. On the role of our official position as the GAC Representative of Thailand to ICANN and Deputy Executive Director of Electronic Transaction Development Agency, Ministry of Information and Technology, Royal Thai Government; and also the fact that we had been participated as individual memberer in Charter Drafting Team of Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information PDP working group. We would like to give some thoughts and express our opinions on this issue for the Working Group as follow: Input Request Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information Charter Questions Whether it is desirable to translate contact information to a single common language or transliterate contact information to a single common script. Reference from http://www.academia.edu/3830294/English_as_a_Lingua_Franca_in_Thailand_Characterisations_and_Implications ? Given that Thailand does not have a history of colonisation by the British and that English is not an official language in the country, Thailand is typically classified as an ?expanding circle? country (Kachru, 2005) in which English is used as a means of intercultural communication. Importantly such a classification also entails that Thailand is a norm dependent country which does not have its own variety of English and which does not use English for intra cultural communication. While the extent to which this classification of English in Thailand will be questioned in this paper, the expanding circle tag serves as a useful, if simplified, means for distinguishing Thailand from countries which use English as a first language, or as an official second language. The linguistic landscape of Thailand is often portrayed as monolingual and highly homogenous with government sources claiming that almost 100% of the population speak standard Thai (National Identity Board, 2000). As might be expected this hides a more complex linguistic picture. Other languages including Chinese, Malay, Lao, and Khmer are also spoken by minority groups (National Identity Board, 2000; Foley, 2005) and the majority of the population use one of the four regional dialects of Thai rather than standard Thai (Simpson and Thammasathien 2007). Nevertheless, given the relatively minor status given to other languages in the country, English forms the ?de facto? second language of Thailand. There are a number of domains in which English is widely used in Thailand including: as a compulsory subject in school and in higher education, as a medium of instruction in international education programs, as the language of international organisations and conferences (including ASEAN and ASEAN +3), for international business transactions, tourism, the internet, global advertising, scientific and technology transfer, media (including imported films and music), international safety and international law(Wongsatorn et al 1996; 2003; Foley, 2005)? >From the reference, even English has given the relatively minor status and not being used for intracultural communication, English, however, is the 'de facto' for intercultural communication and international business transactions including the internet. Therefore, It is quite clear that it is desirable to translate contact information to a single common language or transliterate contact information to a single common script and preferable in English. What exactly the benefits to the community are of translating and/or transliterating contact information, especially in light of the costs that may be connected to translation and/or transliteration? As the result of using single official language system, most of the contact information used is in Thai and the translating and/or transliterating of contact information form Thai to English has been loosely handling by applicants or data owners. Several government entities handling English contact information by accepting the information given by data owners per se, therefore, it is possible that the English contact information is inconsistent. In other cases which government bodies need to provide English contact information such as the geographical name of a street. There are several related standards such as 'Romanization' by Royal Institute, 'the list of exception or reserved words' by geographical name committee. The result of adopting these standards appears in the list of geographical names for places in Thailand in UNGEGN (United Nations Group of Experts on Geographical Names). However, the standards are not widely known and it is not mandatory to adopt. Therefore, it is possible that each government entity could use different method for translation and/or transliteration. >From the stated current condition, if the contact information needs validation, it could be a burden trying to figure out the suitable reference, if any. We have no objection with the approach from the Translation and Transliteration of Whois Contact Information DPD Working Group that this issue is tightly related to the role of government. Currently we are under the consideration to provide the infrastructure for translation and/or transliteration as the single registry system. This approach could benefit as in the most accurate reference for contact information in English and the validation could be handled at the most economic cost. Should translation and/or transliteration of contact information be mandatory for all gTLDs? We support that it should be mandatory. From the statistic, around one-third of the domain names in Thailand registered with ccTLD (.th) and anther two-third of the names are gTLD, which is open to all ICANN's registrars. Many cases that Thai domain owner registers for a domain name from foreign registrar, as the nature of internet is borderless. Not having translation and/or transliteration mandatory for all gTLD would create discrimination to registries and registrars. However to minimize the impact to the cost bearer, the translation and/or transliteration of local language to common language should be established in each country. And this methodology should be accredited by ICANN. Should translation and/or transliteration of contact information be mandatory for all registrants or only those based in certain countries and/or using specific non-ASCII scripts? It is unarguable that the translation and/or transliteration should be mandatory for those cased based in non-ASCII script countries. So it is possible that the non-ASCII script countries have higher priority to catalyst this issue. What impact will translation/transliteration of contact information have on the WHOIS validation as set out under the 2013 Registrar Accreditation Agreement? Reference to section: Whois Accuracy Program Specification ?1(e), "Validate that all postal address fields are consistent across fields (for example: street exists in city, city exists in state/province, city matches postal code) where such information is technically and commercially feaible for the applicable country or territory." This could draw to the question of who would make the decision if a country or territory is technically and commercially feasible and what would be the decision making criteria. As the validation of all postal address both newly registered and the backlog could be costly, it might turn out that not many territories or countries is feasible to comply. Reference to section: Whois Accuracy Program Specification ?1(f) and ?2 "if Registrar does not receive an affirmative response from the Account Holder, Registrar shall verify the applicable contact information manually" It occurs in Thailand that more than half of the domain name owners using gTLD and it is possible to choose foreign Registrars. The manual verification might occur when registrar does not receive an affirmative response via email or phone. Even it is not specified the method, this manual verification could costly for Registrar when it is cross-border verification. This also emphasizes the need of single point of registration system for common language/script of contact information for each country. To minimize any cost that might occur during verification, and the more important point is to provide the eligible contact address information. When should any new policy relating to translation and transliteration of contact information come into effect? (Reference: http://docs.apwg.org/reports/APWG_GlobaTolPhishingSurvey_1H2013.pdf) Thailand has been, disappointedly, in the top-5 of phishing for the past several years. From our view, we see that having translation and transliteration pocily in place would be one of the phishing mitigations as the verified contact information would be the important eligible linkage between internet identities to the real person. We encourage that this policy should come into effect at the earliest possible timeline. Do you have suggestions concerning the basic principles to guide the cost burden discussion, such as the free of charge provision of the information, demand-oriented cost etc.? In particular, the PDP WG is tasked with determining who should decide who should bear the burden translating contact information to a single common language or transliterating contact information to a single common script. This question relates to the concern expressed by the Internationalized Registration Data Working Group (IRD-WG) in its report that there are costs associated with providing translation and transliteration of contact information. For example, if a policy development process (PDP) determined that the registrar must translate or transliterate contact information, this policy would place a cost burden on the registrar. In compliance with the "Proposal by THAILAND?s Government Advisory Committee (GAC)" submitted into the PDP working group earlier, it is government role to facilitate establishment of the infrastructure for translation/transliteration of contact information. Once the infrastructure is in place, the cost of translation/transliteration and the cost of validation should be economic. This eligible registered contact address information will also be applicable for many other applications for data owner, not limited to ICANN whois database but it could also benefit the e-invoice and all electronic transaction services. We would suggest considering demand-oriented approach for this matter. In this case, the demand to translate/transliterate and maintain contact address information is belong to the data owners or registrants, and the demand for address validation could be from registrars. Therefore, the cost of conversion from local language into common language should belong to registrants and the cost for validation should belong to registrars. We are looking forward to gather for a face-to-face meeting during the ICANN Meeting in Singapore. Regards Mr. Wanawit Ahkuputra Deputy Executive Director ETDA Electronic Transactions Development Agency (Public Organization) MICT Ministry of Information and Communication Technology The Government Complex Commemorating His Majesty the King's 80th Birthday Anniversary 120 M.3 Ratthaprasasanabhakti Building (building B), 7th floor, Chaengwattana Rd., Thung Song Hong, Laksi Bangkok 10210, THAILAND Tel : +66 2142 1159 Fax. +66 2143 8071 Mobile +669 301 8818 E-Mail: wanawit at etda.or.th On Feb 5, 2557 BE, at 5:35 AM, Glen de Saint G?ry wrote: Dear GAC representative, dear Thaweesak As you may be aware, the GNSO Council recently initiated a Policy Development Process (PDP) on the Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information; the relevant Issue Report can be found here. A more detailed background is available online on the Working Group?s Wiki where you can also consult the Charter. As part of its efforts to obtain broad input from the ICANN Community at an early stage and we have written to Ms Heather Dryden, Chair of the GAC, already to solicit feedback from the GAC where possible. However, as the matter of translating and/or transliteration of Contact information will be of special significance for countries that do not use Latin Scripts, we thought it useful to contact individual GAC representatives. Please note that we do not seek an official position on this matter but rather would welcome any thoughts and/or experiences you might have and what the best practice might be or ought to be in your country on this matter. An informal response to any of the questions below or any other thoughts you might have on the issue of translation and transliteration of Contact Information would be very much appreciated. Please send these to the GNSO Secretariat (gnso.secretariat at gnso.icann.org) who will forward these to the Working Group; ideally by Tuesday 11 March 2014. Finally, our Working Group is planning to gather for a face-to-face meeting during the forthcoming ICANN Meeting in Singapore. We would be delighted if you could join our discussions should you be in Singapore at the time. We will renew this invitation closer to the time when we have finalized our meeting time and agenda. Many thanks and best wishes, Chris Dillon (Co-Chair) Rudi Vansnick (Co-Chair) Input Request Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information Charter Questions Whether it is desirable to translate contact information to a single common language or transliterate contact information to a single common script. What exactly the benefits to the community are of translating and/or transliterating contact information, especially in light of the costs that may be connected to translation and/or transliteration? Should translation and/or transliteration of contact information be mandatory for all gTLDs? Should translation and/or transliteration of contact information be mandatory for all registrants or only those based in certain countries and/or using specific non-ASCII scripts? What impact will translation/transliteration of contact information have on the WHOIS validation as set out under the 2013 Registrar Accreditation Agreement? When should any new policy relating to translation and transliteration of contact information come into effect? Do you have suggestions concerning the basic principles to guide the cost burden discussion, such as the free of charge provision of the information, demand-oriented cost etc.? In particular, the PDP WG is tasked with determining who should decide who should bear the burden translating contact information to a single common language or transliterating contact information to a single common script. This question relates to the concern expressed by the Internationalized Registration Data Working Group (IRD-WG) in its report that there are costs associated with providing translation and transliteration of contact information. For example, if a policy development process (PDP) determined that the registrar must translate or transliterate contact information, this policy would place a cost burden on the registrar. Glen de Saint G?ry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat at gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From nathalie.peregrine at icann.org Thu Feb 27 10:49:30 2014 From: nathalie.peregrine at icann.org (Nathalie Peregrine) Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2014 02:49:30 -0800 Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] RE: [ntfy-gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] REMINDER: Meeting invitation: Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information PDP Working Group Thursday 27 February 2014 14:00 UTC In-Reply-To: <97D1BA2D-46B3-4145-A841-BE9695E15C68@egyptig.org> References: <00e401cf3373$004dad60$00e90820$@registry.asia> <97D1BA2D-46B3-4145-A841-BE9695E15C68@egyptig.org> Message-ID: Dear Amr, Thank you for this, I will note your tentative apology. Kind regards Nathalie From: Amr Elsadr [mailto:aelsadr at egyptig.org] Sent: Thursday, February 27, 2014 11:05 AM To: Nathalie Peregrine Cc: Jennifer Chung; gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org; Glen de Saint G?ry Subject: Re: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] RE: [ntfy-gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] REMINDER: Meeting invitation: Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information PDP Working Group Thursday 27 February 2014 14:00 UTC Hi, I might not be able to make today's call as well. I will try to, but have another commitment that may last into the hour of our scheduled call. Thanks. Amr Sent from mobile On Feb 27, 2014, at 8:36 AM, Nathalie Peregrine wrote: Dear Jennifer, Thank you for this, your apology has been noted. Kindest regards Nathalie From: owner-gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org [mailto:owner-gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org] On Behalf Of Jennifer Chung Sent: Thursday, February 27, 2014 5:19 AM To: gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org Cc: Glen de Saint G?ry Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] RE: [ntfy-gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] REMINDER: Meeting invitation: Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information PDP Working Group Thursday 27 February 2014 14:00 UTC Dear Colleagues, Apologies to all - I will not be able to attend tomorrow?s call as I will be in transit. Best Regards, Jennifer Chung From: owner-ntfy-gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org [mailto:owner-ntfy-gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org] On Behalf Of Terri Agnew Sent: Tuesday, February 25, 2014 4:51 PM To: ntfy-gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org Cc: gnso-secs at icann.org Subject: [ntfy-gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] REMINDER: Meeting invitation: Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information PDP Working Group Thursday 27 February 2014 14:00 UTC Dear All, The next Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information PDP Working Group teleconference is scheduled for Thursday 27th February 2014 at 1400 UTC 06:00 PST, 09:00 EST, 14:00 London, 15:00 CEST For other places see: http://tinyurl.com/kvadmpj Adobe Connect WITH AUDIO enabled: http://icann.adobeconnect.com/gnsocontactinfopdpwg/ Mailing list archives: http://forum.icann.org/lists/gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg/ Wiki page: https://community.icann.org/x/FTR-Ag The recordings and transcriptions of the calls are posted on the GNSO Master Calendar page: http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/ The dial-in details are below - please let me know if you require a dial-out. _____________________________________________________________________ Participant passcode: CONTACT Dial in numbers: Country Toll Numbers Freephone/ Toll Free Number ARGENTINA 0800-777-0519 AUSTRALIA ADELAIDE: 61-8-8121-4842 1-800-657-260 AUSTRALIA BRISBANE: 61-7-3102-0944 1-800-657-260 AUSTRALIA CANBERRA: 61-2-6100-1944 1-800-657-260 AUSTRALIA MELBOURNE: 61-3-9010-7713 1-800-657-260 AUSTRALIA PERTH: 61-8-9467-5223 1-800-657-260 AUSTRALIA SYDNEY: 61-2-8205-8129 1-800-657-260 AUSTRIA 43-1-92-81-113 0800-005-259 BELGIUM 32-2-400-9861 0800-3-8795 BRAZIL 55-11-3958-0779 0800-7610651 CHILE 1230-020-2863 CHINA CHINA A: 86-400-810-4789 10800-712-1670 CHINA CHINA B: 86-400-810-4789 10800-120-1670 COLOMBIA 01800-9-156474 CROATIA 080-08-06-309 CZECH REPUBLIC 420-2-25-98-56-64 800-700-177 DENMARK 45-7014-0284 8088-8324 ESTONIA 800-011-1093 FINLAND 358-9-5424-7162 0-800-9-14610 FRANCE LYON: 33-4-26-69-12-85 080-511-1496 FRANCE MARSEILLE: 33-4-86-06-00-85 080-511-1496 FRANCE PARIS: 33-1-70-70-60-72 080-511-1496 GERMANY 49-69-2222-20362 0800-664-4247 GREECE 30-80-1-100-0687 00800-12-7312 HONG KONG 852-3001-3863 800-962-856 HUNGARY 36-1-700-8856 06-800-12755 INDIA BANGALORE: 91-80-61275204 INDIA MUMBAI: 91-22-61501629 INDIA INDIA A: 000-800-852-1268 INDIA INDIA B: 000-800-001-6305 INDIA INDIA C: 1800-300-00491 INDONESIA 001-803-011-3982 IRELAND 353-1-246-7646 1800-992-368 ISRAEL 1-80-9216162 ITALY MILAN: 39-02-3600-6007 800-986-383 ITALY ROME: 39-06-8751-6018 800-986-383 ITALY TORINO: 39-011-510-0118 800-986-383 JAPAN OSAKA: 81-6-7739-4799 0066-33-132439 JAPAN TOKYO: 81-3-5539-5191 0066-33-132439 LATVIA 8000-3185 LUXEMBOURG 352-27-000-1364 8002-9246 MALAYSIA 1-800-81-3065 MEXICO GUADALAJARA (JAL): 52-33-3208-7310 001-866-376-9696 MEXICO MEXICO CITY: 52-55-5062-9110 001-866-376-9696 MEXICO MONTERREY: 52-81-2482-0610 001-866-376-9696 NETHERLANDS 31-20-718-8588 0800-023-4378 NEW ZEALAND 64-9-970-4771 0800-447-722 NORWAY 47-21-590-062 800-15157 PANAMA 011-001-800-5072065 PERU 0800-53713 PHILIPPINES 63-2-858-3716 1800-111-42453 POLAND 00-800-1212572 PORTUGAL 8008-14052 ROMANIA 40-31-630-01-79 RUSSIA 8-10-8002-0144011 SAUDI ARABIA 800-8-110087 SINGAPORE 65-6883-9230 800-120-4663 SLOVAK REPUBLIC 421-2-322-422-25 0800-002066 SLOVENIA 0-800-81310 SOUTH AFRICA 080-09-80414 SOUTH KOREA 82-2-6744-1083 00798-14800-7352 SPAIN 34-91-414-25-33 800-300-053 SWEDEN 46-8-566-19-348 0200-884-622 SWITZERLAND 41-44-580-6398 0800-120-032 TAIWAN 886-2-2795-7379 00801-137-797 THAILAND 001-800-1206-66056 TURKEY 00-800-151-0516 UNITED ARAB EMIRATES 8000-35702370 UNITED KINGDOM BIRMINGHAM: 44-121-210-9025 0808-238-6029 UNITED KINGDOM GLASGOW: 44-141-202-3225 0808-238-6029 UNITED KINGDOM LEEDS: 44-113-301-2125 0808-238-6029 UNITED KINGDOM LONDON: 44-20-7108-6370 0808-238-6029 UNITED KINGDOM MANCHESTER: 44-161-601-1425 0808-238-6029 URUGUAY 000-413-598-3421 USA 1-517-345-9004 866-692-5726 VENEZUELA 0800-1-00-3702 Thank you. Kind regards, Terri Agnew For GNSO Secretariat -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 5457 bytes Desc: not available URL: From nathalie.peregrine at icann.org Thu Feb 27 10:50:22 2014 From: nathalie.peregrine at icann.org (Nathalie Peregrine) Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2014 02:50:22 -0800 Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] FW: Request for input In-Reply-To: <8EF67D255A8F47E29D9C03F358D58FC1@WUKPC> References: <8EF67D255A8F47E29D9C03F358D58FC1@WUKPC> Message-ID: Dear Wolf-Ulrich, Thank you for this, apology noted. Kindest regards Nathalie From: owner-gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org [mailto:owner-gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org] On Behalf Of WUKnoben Sent: Thursday, February 27, 2014 10:59 AM To: Lars Hoffmann; gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org Subject: Re: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] FW: Request for input >From my GNSO council experience with the GAC I didn't expect a different answer - I'm even more happy having received any GAC answer. If there is a F2F WG meeting planned in Singapore I'd suggest to invite the GAC members who have been asked to answer the questionnaire. I'm really sorry that today I have to miss the call again. My apologies! It's not because of the carnaval season in our region. Best regards Wolf-Ulrich From: Lars Hoffmann Sent: Monday, February 24, 2014 3:09 PM To: gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] FW: Request for input Dear Working Group members, Please find below the response from Olof Nordling, ICANN Senior Director GAC Relations, with regard to the WG's request to meet with the GAC in Singapore. Spoiler alert: It's not good news. It might be useful at this stage for the Chairs (or staff if you wish so) to re-send the input request to the individual GAC members that were contacted and have not yet replied as this might be at this stage the most promising way to gather at least some input from some of the GAC members. Best wishes, Lars From: Olof Nordling Date: Monday, February 24, 2014 2:59 PM To: Lars Hoffmann Cc: "gacsec at gac.icann.org" , Julie Hedlund Subject: RE: Request for input Dear Lars, Thank you for your kind request from the WG on Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information for input from the GAC and for a meeting in Singapore. This has been brought to the GAC Chair's attention. On her behalf I must inform you that, in view of the time available and the current number of priority matters to address by the GAC where a joint position is essential, any joint response by the GAC to the questions raised cannot realistically be foreseen. Nor does the time allow for a separate meeting with the WG in Singapore. Very best regards Olof -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 5457 bytes Desc: not available URL: From nathalie.peregrine at icann.org Thu Feb 27 13:13:52 2014 From: nathalie.peregrine at icann.org (Nathalie Peregrine) Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2014 05:13:52 -0800 Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] FW: Request for input In-Reply-To: References: <8EF67D255A8F47E29D9C03F358D58FC1@WUKPC> Message-ID: Dear Ching, Thank you ever so much for this, your apology has been noted. Kind regards Nathalie From: Ching Chiao [mailto:ching.chiao at gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, February 27, 2014 2:13 PM To: Nathalie Peregrine; gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org Cc: Lars Hoffmann Subject: Re: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] FW: Request for input Please also accept my apology for not being able to participate today's call. As mentioned in the Council call, the RySG will submit a reply and would appreciate the WG extend the deadline for a week or so. Thanks! Ching On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 6:50 PM, Nathalie Peregrine wrote: Dear Wolf-Ulrich, Thank you for this, apology noted. Kindest regards Nathalie From: owner-gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org [mailto:owner-gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org] On Behalf Of WUKnoben Sent: Thursday, February 27, 2014 10:59 AM To: Lars Hoffmann; gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org Subject: Re: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] FW: Request for input >From my GNSO council experience with the GAC I didn't expect a different answer - I'm even more happy having received any GAC answer. If there is a F2F WG meeting planned in Singapore I'd suggest to invite the GAC members who have been asked to answer the questionnaire. I'm really sorry that today I have to miss the call again. My apologies! It's not because of the carnaval season in our region. Best regards Wolf-Ulrich From: Lars Hoffmann Sent: Monday, February 24, 2014 3:09 PM To: gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg at icann.org Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] FW: Request for input Dear Working Group members, Please find below the response from Olof Nordling, ICANN Senior Director GAC Relations, with regard to the WG's request to meet with the GAC in Singapore. Spoiler alert: It's not good news. It might be useful at this stage for the Chairs (or staff if you wish so) to re-send the input request to the individual GAC members that were contacted and have not yet replied as this might be at this stage the most promising way to gather at least some input from some of the GAC members. Best wishes, Lars From: Olof Nordling Date: Monday, February 24, 2014 2:59 PM To: Lars Hoffmann Cc: "gacsec at gac.icann.org" , Julie Hedlund Subject: RE: Request for input Dear Lars, Thank you for your kind request from the WG on Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information for input from the GAC and for a meeting in Singapore. This has been brought to the GAC Chair's attention. On her behalf I must inform you that, in view of the time available and the current number of priority matters to address by the GAC where a joint position is essential, any joint response by the GAC to the questions raised cannot realistically be foreseen. Nor does the time allow for a separate meeting with the WG in Singapore. Very best regards Olof -- Ching Chiao Founder and CEO www. Brandma.co +886.918.211372 +86.135.20187032 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 5457 bytes Desc: not available URL: From julie.hedlund at icann.org Thu Feb 27 15:16:45 2014 From: julie.hedlund at icann.org (Julie Hedlund) Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2014 07:16:45 -0800 Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] Actions: PDP WG on Translation/Transliteration of Contact Info In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Dear PDP WG members, Please see below the actions from our meeting on 27 February. These also are posted to the wiki page at: https://community.icann.org/display/tatcipdp/27+February+2014. Actions: 1. (From 13 February): Think about possible scenarios and check on those that the EWG used in its reports - pay attention to difference between literal and figurative translation 2. Responses from SOs/ACs: Extend the deadline to the end of March. Staff will schedule a meeting in Singapore with the ALAC if possible. Best regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 5041 bytes Desc: not available URL: From terri.agnew at icann.org Thu Feb 27 16:25:19 2014 From: terri.agnew at icann.org (Terri Agnew) Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2014 08:25:19 -0800 Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] MP3 Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information PDP WG meeting - 27 February 2014 Message-ID: Dear All, Please find the MP3 recording for the Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information PDP Charter Drafting Team call held on Thursday 27 February at 14:00 UTC at: http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-transliteration-contact-20140227-en.mp3 On page: http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar#feb The recordings and transcriptions of the calls are posted on the GNSO Master Calendar page: http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/ Attendees: Jim Galvin - SSAC Ahkuputra Wanawit ? GAC Mae Suchayapim Siriwat ? GAC Peter Green - NCUC Petter Rindforth ? IPC Rudi Vansnick ? NPCO Chris Dillon ? NCSG Pitinan Kooarmornpatana ? GAC Supachok Jantarapatin - SOI Apologies: Justine Chew ? At-Large Jennifer Chung - RySG Wolf-Ulrich Knoben ? ISPCP Ephriam Percy Kenyanito ? NCUC Amr Elsadar - NCUC Ching Chiao - RySG ICANN staff: Julie Hedlund Lars Hoffman Nathalie Peregrine Terri Agnew ** Please let me know if your name has been left off the list ** Wiki page: http://tinyurl.com/mpwxstx Thank you. Kind regards, Terri Agnew GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat at gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org Adobe Chat Transcript for Thursday 27 February 2014: Terri Agnew:Welcome to the Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information PDP Working Group on Thursday 27th of February 2014 Rudi Vansnick:hi everyone Chris Dillon:Hello all Mae Suchayapim Siriwat:hello Mae Suchayapim Siriwat:hello Rudi Vansnick:hello we are awaiting other particpants to join Pitinan Kooarmornpatana:hello all Julie Hedlund:Hello everyone. I am currently waiting to get on the call. Chris Dillon:Same here Julie Hedlund:Some very jazzy music! WANAWIT Ahkuputra:Sawasdee Everyone Rudi Vansnick:Chris are you on the audio call ? Petter Rindforth:at least they have now thanked me for calling... Julie Hedlund:I am now on the call. Petter Rindforth:I'm on! Rudi Vansnick:+1 Julie ... that's the perception I have also as there seems to be some doubts about the impact as the RDS is also on the table Pitinan Kooarmornpatana:+1 with Julie Julie Hedlund:@Chris, yes it would be 30 days extension Julie Hedlund:Yes, there is a meeting on Monday morning, tentatively 7:30 to 8:30 am. Julie Hedlund:Petter: As you may know we requested a meeting with the GAC and that the GAC has said they cannot meet. Julie Hedlund:Rudi mentioned the ALAC, but this will need to be scheduled ASAP and it is possible the ALAC's schedule is already full. Rudi Vansnick:i'm in contact with Olivier and insisting in having that meeting as ALAC coves all regions ! Rudi Vansnick:coves =covers Petter Rindforth:Is there any possibilities to have some more "informal" GAC meetings? Terri Agnew:Supachok Jantarapatin has joined Julie Hedlund:@Petter: The GAC does not do "informal" meetings, unfortunately. Julie Hedlund:@Rudi: Yes, perhaps an individual approach may work. Petter Rindforth:That's what I meant with "informal" meetings. Yes, let's try! Rudi Vansnick:@Julie: i informed Olivier you will onctact Heidi Julie Hedlund:@Rudi: Thank you very much. Julie Hedlund:All -- I will unsync the document so that you can move it yourselves. Peter Green-CONAC:I'm interested in the infrastructure concept Peter Green-CONAC:who would initiate to build up that? Rudi Vansnick:i think it is even worser for the western world to cover the validations WANAWIT Ahkuputra:In Thailand - ETDA (MICT) and the Post of Thailand are now in the discussion WANAWIT Ahkuputra:Yes please fell free use the comment to go public Rudi Vansnick:thank you Wanawit Rudi Vansnick:Chris +1 Peter Green-CONAC:thanks, Rudi Rudi Vansnick:maybe Jim has some info ? Julie Hedlund:@Chris: I will try to pull the text from the wiki. Chris Dillon:https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=44960091 Julie Hedlund:Here also is the link to the new validation question on the wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/tatcipdp/8+Verification+and+validation Rudi Vansnick:this is really a marvelous sample ! Rudi Vansnick:I have a question for Pitinan Nathalie Peregrine:Can all please mute your speakers of you are talking via the AC room Julie Hedlund:@Pitinan with the echo it is hard to understand you. Pitinan Kooarmornpatana:I muted mine Julie Hedlund:We need to get the echo taken care of. Anyone who is not speaking should be on mute. Pitinan Kooarmornpatana:I guess someone leave the mic unmute Julie Hedlund:Thank you everyone! Pitinan Kooarmornpatana:i'll type here Pitinan Kooarmornpatana:there is no 'official' English .. however, it is widely recognized by local that this road = wireless road Rudi Vansnick:thank you very much Pitinan .. Rudi Vansnick:we have similar problems even in ASCII = no street WANAWIT Ahkuputra:UNGEGN had implemention the GeoGraphical Database dsitributed Rudi Vansnick:what if the standard deviates too much from the real translated word ? Chris Dillon:Sorry, Rudi Rudi Vansnick:no prob better Pitinan explains first WANAWIT Ahkuputra:That the good point thanks you Rudi Vansnick:the other way is also dangerous as one may go before the other at registration phase Rudi Vansnick:go ahead Chris Rudi Vansnick:maybe we need to prioritize questions and subquestions Rudi Vansnick:i was thinking about a table format with indications of priority and who it addresses primary Jim Galvin:folks I need to drop off for my next call Julie Hedlund:@Chris: The survey has gone out but they are interested in comments. Rudi Vansnick:many thanks Jim for your participations, till soon Julie Hedlund:They also will provide a presentation to us in Singapore. Julie Hedlund:During the WG meeting. WANAWIT Ahkuputra:Thank you Julie Hedlund:Thank you everyone. Pitinan Kooarmornpatana:Thank you all Peter Green-CONAC:thanks all Peter Green-CONAC:bye Mae Suchayapim Siriwat 2:Thank, bye Chris Dillon:Goodbye all! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 5417 bytes Desc: not available URL: