[Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Topic Follow-Up - Non-Capital City Names
sophie.hey at valideus.com
Fri Aug 30 13:38:20 UTC 2019
I would just like to raise some concerns about proposal 2.
First, the statement that “established lists can be used as objective references in the evaluation process”. The text currently states in the AGB “Unlike other types of geographic names, there are no established lists that can be used as objective references in the evaluation process”. As I understand it, the existing AGB text is not saying that there are “no lists”, but rather no lists that can be used as an objective reference for evaluation purposes.
Second, my concern with the UN Demographic Yearbook list is that it is not intended to provide a comprehensive list of all cities. Rather, it is part of a publication setting out global statistics. This means that there are limitations on how the information in the publication (including Table 8) can be used. For example, the localities listed are not necessarily the actual name of the locality as where the names are not in the Roman alphabet, the names have been “romanized”. Further, to be included in the list, a locality must have a population more than 100,000 or be a capital city. While the list does recognise the different meaning of “city” in different countries and territories, the list does not distinguish which localities are cities, urban agglomerations, municipalities or another type of locality. This is in contrast to 18.104.22.168.2 part 2 referring to “non-capital cities”.
Given these factors, I am not comfortable including the UN Demographic Yearbook as anything more than a reference point for potential applicants.
D: +44 (0) 20 7421 8252
E: sophie.hey at valideus.com<mailto:sophie.hey at valideus.com>
From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces at icann.org> On Behalf Of Emily Barabas
Sent: 30 August 2019 07:11
To: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org
Subject: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Topic Follow-Up - Non-Capital City Names
Sent on behalf of the Work Track 5 Co-Leaders
Dear Work Track 5 members,
This email follows up on agenda item 4 covered on this week’s WT5 call: Closure of Discussion on Non-Capital City Names (agenda, notes, recording and slides available here: https://community.icann.org/x/f6ujBg). This is a topic that has been discussed extensively over the last two years with many areas in which members have divergent opinions. This week, the Work Track considered updated versions of two final proposals that have been discussed on the mailing list. Both proposals offer what the Co-Leaders view as modest adjustments to the existing Applicant Guidebook text. Note that for proposal 2, the proposer has confirmed that the correct connector between sub-sections (a) and (b) is “AND.” See attached for reference.
If they have not already done so, WT members are encouraged to respond on-list about whether or not they believe they can support or accept the attached proposals. At this point, wordsmithing/redlining is strongly discouraged, especially if suggested edits fundamentally change the nature of the proposal. If the group comes to general agreement on one of the proposals, minor adjustments can be made to the text before finalizing recommendations if the group agrees.
Our discussion of non-capital city names at this stage are narrowly focused. Please do not re-open broad debates, re-state arguments already discussed, bring forward new proposals, or request new data/research. There has been ample opportunity over the last two years for the Work Track to discuss these issues and the Work Track is concluding its work. The task now is to see if the Work Track can reach agreement on these final proposals before closing discussion. As a reminder, if the Work Track cannot come to an agreement on a change to the 2012 Applicant Guidebook provisions, the status quo will remain.
We look forward to discussing your input on next week’s call and closing this discussion.
Olga Cavalli, Annebeth Lange, Javier Rúa-Jovet, Martin Sutton
The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential to the intended recipient. They may not be disclosed, used by or copied in any way by anyone other than the intended recipient. If you have received this message in error, please return it to the sender (deleting the body of the email and attachments in your reply) and immediately and permanently delete it. Please note that the Com Laude Group does not accept any responsibility for viruses and it is your responsibility to scan or otherwise check this email and any attachments. The Com Laude Group does not accept liability for statements which are clearly the sender's own and not made on behalf of the group or one of its member entities. The Com Laude Group includes Nom-IQ Limited t/a Com Laude, a company registered in England and Wales with company number 5047655 and registered office at 28-30 Little Russell Street, London, WC1A 2HN England; Valideus Limited, a company registered in England and Wales with company number 06181291 and registered office at 28-30 Little Russell Street, London, WC1A 2HN England; Demys Limited, a company registered in Scotland with company number SC197176, having its registered office at 33 Melville Street, Edinburgh, Lothian, EH3 7JF Scotland; Consonum, Inc. dba Com Laude USA and Valideus USA, headquartered at 1751 Pinnacle Drive, Suite 600, McLean, VA 22102, USA; Com Laude (Japan) Corporation, a company registered in Japan having its registered office at Suite 319,1-3-21 Shinkawa, Chuo-ku, Tokyo, 104-0033, Japan. For further information see www.comlaude.com<https://comlaude.com>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5