[Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt3] WT3 - Agenda & Materials for Tuesday, 26 September @ 15:00 UTC - String Similarity

[Karen Day]

Dear All,

In preparation for our next call, Tuesday, 26 September 2017 @ 15:00 UTC, please see below for our proposed agenda.  We will be focusing on string similarity.  In addition to the CC2 comments  we received, which I am attaching for your review, I’d like us to again look at a the proposals that were submitted to our group in February.  Those are attached here as well and if you have time and inclination, feel free to start making markups or highlight specific points of concern to you that we can address on the call.  Staff is working on gathering some statistics for us on common ownership of singular and  plural gTLDs as had been previously requested.

Have a great weekend and for those of you celebrating the holiday, happy new year.
Karen
__________________________

1.Welcome & Review of Agenda
2. Updates to SOI
3. Plenary Update
5. CC2 — String Similarity — Q 3.4.1 - 3.4.6
6. AOB

CC2 Questions on String Similarity  [ Themes document attached.  Full responses are available for review at https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1A5uaxBAgmg7QsFuqMdVvt1HxNZ4jKXnm3Hp0gZra7U0/edit#gid=1452007373  ]

3.4.1 - There was a perception that consistency and predictability of the string similarity evaluation needs to be improved. Do you have examples or evidence of issues?
If so, do you have suggested changes to the policy recommendations or implementation that may lead to improvement?
For instance, should the standard of string confusion that the evaluation panel used be updated or refined in any way?

3.4.2 - Should the approach for string similarity in gTLDs be harmonized with the way in which they are handled in ccTLDs (ccNSO IDN ccTLD Fast Track Process is described here: https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/fast-track-2012-02-25-en)?


3.4.3 - The WG and the wider community have raised concerns specifically related to singles and plurals of the same word.
Do you have suggestions on how to develop guidance on singles and plurals that will lead to predictable outcomes?
Would providing for more predictability of outcomes unfairly prejudice the rights of applicants or others?

3.4.4 - Do you believe that there should be some sort of mechanism to allow for a change of applied-for TLD when it is determined to be in contention with one or more other strings?
If so, do you have suggestions on a workable mechanism?

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt3/attachments/20170922/02427172/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: CC2 Themes  Work Track 3 - String Similarity.docx
Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document
Size: 38779 bytes
Desc: CC2 Themes  Work Track 3 - String Similarity.docx
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt3/attachments/20170922/02427172/CC2ThemesWorkTrack3-StringSimilarity-0001.docx>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: StringProposal_Registries.docx
Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document
Size: 27170 bytes
Desc: StringProposal_Registries.docx
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt3/attachments/20170922/02427172/StringProposal_Registries-0001.docx>