[Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Proposed Agenda - WT5 meeting - 17 July 2019 at 20:00 UTC

Wed Jul 17 19:39:49 UTC 2019

Greg, all,

The specific example of São Tomé is as we understand, a capital city. São Tomé translated to English for instance is Saint Thomas. Converting São Tomé to a DNS label would result in this punycode label: xn--so tom-3ta7c. Transposing the accented and diacritic characters to generate Sao Tome is neither a translation nor a conversion to a DNS label and is potentially something different? To the extent this group wants to move forward with this “something different,” the conversation may benefit from considering additional details and criteria (e.g., is it limited to Latin scripts, is there a specific set of characters that will be converted and if so, to what characters, are there exceptions, etc.). From the staff perspective, it might be helpful to try and better define the problem being mitigated and to consider whether the scope of what is currently being proposed might have an impact beyond just geographic names.

For completeness and in response to Greg’ message, there are two aspects to the lists Greg mentioned. 
First, there is the finite set of certain Red Cross names to be protected: https://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/igo-ingo/red-cross-identifiers-proposed-reservation-06aug18-en.pdf
Subsequently, there is the conversion of those names into DNS labels, which is in draft form here: https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/56136698/RedCrossNamesLabels_20190524.xlsx?version=1&modificationDate=1559231950000&api=v2

Best,

Steve

From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces at icann.org> on behalf of Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc at gmail.com>
Date: Wednesday, July 17, 2019 at 11:49 AM
To: "lists at christopherwilkinson.eu" <lists at christopherwilkinson.eu>
Cc: "gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org" <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org>
Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Proposed Agenda - WT5 meeting - 17 July 2019 at 20:00 UTC

I think this discussion is somewhat misplaced as a question of language(s).  It seems to really be a question of defining the DNS equivalent of a protected term (the U-Label?).

It would be helpful if staff could circulate the final list of Red Cross/Red Crescent protected names, which demonstrates how this was done in that context.

It would also be helpful if we could try to identify the substance of this or any other discussion and avoid getting hung up on word choices alone.

Greg

On Wed, Jul 17, 2019 at 7:57 AM lists at christopherwilkinson.eu <lists at christopherwilkinson.eu> wrote:

Good afternoon:  May I demur to the expression  ASCII “root”. 

ASCII is a rather limited sub set of Latin characters, currently in use. It is NOT the ‘root' of anything.

Actually, I had thought that the early IDN implementations had incorporated all accented and diacritic Latin characters into the available character sets, 

and that it was no longer necessary to refer to transpositions or transliterations, etc., at all. 

Except of course to the the IDN version of the name (e.g. xn--so-tom-3ta7c).

 Apparently I may have been wrong.

CW

On 16 Jul 2019, at 22:05, Katrin Ohlmer | DOTZON GmbH <ohlmer at dotzon.com> wrote:

Dear All, dear Emily,

the Cons of our geoTLD proposal seem to be related to the initial wording, which suggested to use transliterations. But the new proposal relates to transpositions (“The transposition of accented and diacritic characters….”). Maybe the person who worded the Cons may want to react prior to our call and redraft?

Kind regards,

Katrin

DOTZON GmbH - digital identities for tomorrow
Akazienstrasse 28 [google.com]
10823 Berlin [google.com]
Deutschland - Germany [google.com]
Tel: +49 30 49802722
Fax: +49 30 49802727
Mobile: +49 173 2019240
ohlmer at dotzon.consulting
www.dotzon.consulting [dotzon.consulting]

Besuchen Sie uns auf LinkedIn [de.linkedin.com].

DOTZON GmbH
Registergericht: Amtsgericht Berlin-Charlottenburg, HRB 118598
Geschäftsführer: Katrin Ohlmer
Sitz der Gesellschaft: Akazienstrasse 28, 10823 Berlin [google.com]

Von: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces at icann.org> Im Auftrag von Emily Barabas
Gesendet: Dienstag, 16. Juli 2019 21:17
An: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org
Betreff: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Proposed Agenda - WT5 meeting - 17 July 2019 at 20:00 UTC

Dear all,

Please note one addition in blue to the summary below for agenda item 2 reflecting additional input from Katrin.

Kind regards,

Emily

From: Emily Barabas <emily.barabas at icann.org>
Date: Tuesday, 16 July 2019 at 12:12
To: "gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org" <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org>
Subject: Proposed Agenda - WT5 meeting - 17 July 2019 at 20:00 UTC

Dear Work Track 5 members,

Please find below the proposed agenda for the WT5 meeting tomorrow 17 July 2019 at 20:00 UTC:

1. Welcome/Agenda Review/SOI Updates

2. Languages/Translations (see additional information below)

3. Additional Categories of Terms (non-AGB Terms)

4. Substantive review of comments in response to Initial Report questions e1-e5.
We will reference the public comments summary document: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1rsyxCEBd6ax3Rb_w1kms_E9n29XL1_lw3Yp9XQ4TeCY/edit?ts=5ce64d6d# [docs.google.com].
For reference, full text of comments is available at: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1WKSC_pPBviCnbHxW171ZIp4CzuhQXRCV1NR2ruagrxs/edit#gid=543808477 [docs.google.com]
5. AOB

For agenda item 2, the leadership team has prepared the following summary of options discussed and welcomes further input to support reaching a conclusion on this issue.

As a reminder:
In the 2012 Applicant Guidebook, a string was considered unavailable if it was a translation in any language of the following categories of country and territory names: long-form name listed in the ISO 3166-1 standard; short-form name listed in the ISO 3166-1 standard; separable component of a country name designated on the “Separable Country Names List.”
In the 2012 round, applicants were required to obtain letters of support or non-objection from the relevant governments or public authorities for “An application for any string that is a representation, in any language, of the capital city name of any country or territory listed in the ISO 3166-1 standard.”

WT5 has discussed the following proposal as an alternative to the “in any language” standard, and two possible additions. The tables below capture pros and cons mentioned for each option.

Proposal: translations in UN and official languages

à For those countries that have no official language, include “de-facto” official languages (a list would need to be identified for this)

à Supplement with a curative mechanism that allows for objections in the case of commonly used languages 

Possible addition 1: transliteration into ASCII and conversion to DNS labels

Proposed re-wording:  The transposition of accented and diacritic characters in Latin-based scripts to their equivalent ASCII root. This would protect for example sao-tome as a DNS-Label of São Tomé along-side the IDN version of the name (xn--so-tom-3ta7c).

Pros
Cons
>From one perspective, this allows names such as Den Haag or São Tomé to be protected with denhaag/den-hag or sao-tome/saotome.

>From one perspective, ASCII is not a language but
an encoding of a set of (alphabetic) glyphs so transliterating into ASCII doesn't make sense.
>From one perspective, this can be a limited and clearly defined list.
>From one perspective, for the same source language one can easily have different transliterated forms depending on the target language. This provision may cause confusion and uncertainty because there is a lack of standardization for transliteration.

Possible addition 2: languages spoken by X% of people in the country/territory/capital city (to represent relevant national, regional and community languages)

Pros
Cons
>From one perspective, some communities and groups strongly identify with translations of names in non-official languages and this proposal would offer protection for names translated into those languages.

>From one perspective, there is no standard definition of relevant national, regional and community languages and no existing list from which to draw. The term would have to be clearly defined so that it can be effectively implemented.

>From one perspective, it should be possible to create a list of relevant national, regional and community languages in implementation, especially if the group provides a definition to use. ICANN Org or the Geographic Names Panel should be able to create definitions.
>From one perspective, it is unclear if there is an official, objective data source available that can be used in implementation.

Kind regards,

Emily

Emily Barabas | Policy Manager

ICANN | Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers

Email: emily.barabas at icann.org | Phone: +31 (0)6 84507976

_______________________________________________
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
_______________________________________________
By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy [icann.org]) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos [icann.org]). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5/attachments/20190717/96e3549c/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 4600 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5/attachments/20190717/96e3549c/smime-0001.p7s>