[Idngwg] FW: [Ext] haven't received any response from you

[Kal Feher]

Hello Sarmad,

I don't recall the communication. Was it discussed in one of our  
meetings and were there any action points from that discussion that we  
have failed to take?


On 11/5/18 10:37 pm, Sarmad Hussain wrote:
> Dear All,
>
> We received the following communication from JPRS today.  Please let us know
> how you would want to respond to it.
>
> Regards,
> Sarmad
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: yoshitaka at jprs.co.jp [mailto:yoshitaka at jprs.co.jp]
> Sent: Friday, May 11, 2018 2:49 AM
> To: Mats Dufberg <mats.dufberg at iis.se>
> Cc: Sarmad Hussain <sarmad.hussain at icann.org>; Pitinan Kooarmornpatana
> <pitinan.koo at icann.org>
> Subject: [Ext] haven't received any response from you
>
> Dear IDN guidelines WG Chair,
> (CC: Sarmad、Pitinan)
>
> On 30 March, I sent you our proposed change on the IDN implementation
> guidelines document, following the suggestion made in the WG public meeting
> in San Juan on 12 March (pasted below). For these one and half months, I
> have not received any response to that from you.
>
> Today, I happened to find that "Final Proposed Draft v. 4.0 of the IDN
> Guidelines"
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_news_anno
> uncement-2D2018-2D05-2D10-2Den&d=DwICJg&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms
> 7xcl4I5cM&r=KTETvEaGPwPcawI-QmNa-kiv-ZBvdgyyLm-mxd028M4&m=zptC-TxcZW1PmY1jJ5
> LzXVqPvD3ZlsiKvb4agfECycQ&s=wxk9m-mdZnan6Q2PmV36GLfLEXk6eKFuZRXMIFdZLeg&e=
> was published.
>
> It was a surprise and disappointing for us to find it without prior
> correspondence regarding our proposal sent to you on 30 March.
>
> Yoshitaka Okuno
> Manager, Services Development Department Japan Registry Services Co., Ltd.
>
>
> On Fri, 30 Mar 2018 17:40:59 +0900
> yoshitaka at jprs.co.jp wrote:
>> Dear IDN guidelines working group,
>>
>> Please refer to the following comments and proposal.
>> The comments and proposal are being sent to you, following your
>> suggestion made in IDN Guidelines Working Group meeting in San Juan.
>>
>> In the working group meeting, the essence was orally stated by Hiro
>> Hotta, JPRS in the meeting room.
>>
>> I hope this may be of help to you.
>>
>>
>> [Summary]
>>
>> 1. As described in current guidelines, the issues of visually confusable
>>     characters are not specific to the cases with commingled use of
>>     multiple scripts.
>>
>>     We believe Japanese domain labels fall on the exceptional cases
>>     stated in Guideline#15.
>>     Kanji, Hiragana, and Katakana scrips are daily used in a
>>     commingled manner based on established orthographies and
>>     conventions in Japan. Such comingled use is allowed even in
>>     single words. This means Japanese people consider the collective
>>     set of Kanji, Hiragana, and Katakana characters to belong to ONE
>>     script in constituting Japanese words, just as native English
>>     writers/readers consider English characters to belong to ONE
>>     script.
>>
>>     Therefore, in the case where comingled use of UNICODE scripts is
>>     allowed by Guideline#15, restrictions (if any) should be the same
>>     as in the case of one UNICODE script in constituting domain
>>     labels.
>>
>> 2. In Additional Note IV, the guidelines of visually confusable
>>     characters are described. We think they are the good notes because
>>     the issues of visually confusable characters are clearly pointed.
>>
>>     Taking into account the fact that issues of visually confusable
>>     characters reside both in the case of a single UNICODE script and
>>     in the case where comingled UNICODE scripts are allowed, we think
>>     the sentence "must not be allowed to" is overdescribed in
>>     guideline#16.
>>
>> [Suggestion]
>>
>>    We would like to propose as follows.
>>
>>    - The guideline#16 is removed from section 2.5.2 and is moved to
>>      a newly created section between 2.5.2 and 2.5.3. The new section
>>      is headlined as "2.5.X Visually confusable characters".
>>
>>    - The guideline#16 will be modified as follows.
>>      -------------------------------------------------------------------
>>      16.
>>      Visually confusable characters had better not co-exist in a single
>>      set of permissible code points. TLD registries should clearly
>>      define a corresponding policy and IDN Table to minimize confusion
>>      between domain names. Also see Additional Note IV.
>>      
>> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Thanks for your consideration.
>> ----
>> Yoshitaka Okuno
>> Manager, Services Development Department Japan Registry Services Co.,
>> Ltd.
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Idngwg mailing list
> Idngwg at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/idngwg

-- 
Kal Feher
@kalfeher

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/idngwg/attachments/20180512/5ed412b7/attachment.html>