<html><head></head><body><div style="color:#000; background-color:#fff; font-family:Helvetica Neue, Helvetica, Arial, Lucida Grande, sans-serif;font-size:16px"><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1531181726115_8160"><span id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1531181726115_8167">My take on the variants task was that we were trying to identify cases which would always be rejected. So that those cases would not need to go thru the more extensive, time consuming, and labor intensive, process. If something is always going to be rejected, why expend the time and effort to do so manually? <br></span></div><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1531181726115_8320"><span id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1531181726115_8167"><br></span></div><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1531181726115_8446"><span id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1531181726115_8167">Granted, the members of the IP could probably have done the variants task for Latin themselves. But since the process was defined to cover all of the various scripts for IDN, it got left to us. We just are subject to more micromanaging because the IP members know more about (some of) our languages. </span></div><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1531181726115_8161"> </div><div class="signature" id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1531181726115_8162">Bill Jouris<br>Inside Products<br>bill.jouris@insidethestack.com<br>831-659-8360<br>925-855-9512 (direct)</div><div class="qtdSeparateBR" id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1531181726115_8294"><br><br></div><div class="yahoo_quoted" id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1531181726115_8469" style="display: block;"> <div style="font-family: Helvetica Neue, Helvetica, Arial, Lucida Grande, sans-serif; font-size: 16px;" id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1531181726115_8468"> <div style="font-family: HelveticaNeue, Helvetica Neue, Helvetica, Arial, Lucida Grande, sans-serif; font-size: 16px;" id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1531181726115_8467"> <div dir="ltr" id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1531181726115_8466"> <font id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1531181726115_8470" size="2" face="Arial"> <hr size="1"> <b><span style="font-weight:bold;">From:</span></b> Mats Dufberg <mats.dufberg@iis.se><br> <b><span style="font-weight: bold;">To:</span></b> Michael Bauland <Michael.Bauland@knipp.de>; Bill Jouris <bill.jouris@insidethestack.com>; Mirjana Tasić <Mirjana.Tasic@rnids.rs>; "latingp@icann.org" <latingp@icann.org> <br> <b><span style="font-weight: bold;">Sent:</span></b> Tuesday, July 10, 2018 4:50 AM<br> <b><span style="font-weight: bold;">Subject:</span></b> Re: [Latingp] ODG: ODG: Variants -- Case for Considering Upper Case<br> </font> </div> <div class="y_msg_container" id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1531181726115_8471"><br><div dir="ltr">I have to admit that I find the variant task strange.<br clear="none"><br clear="none">Let me first comment the repertoire task. In that we were expected define the criteria for inclusion and exclusion of characters and then evaluate language sources. I think that was a quite reasonable task.<br clear="none"><br clear="none">When it comes the variant task we are expected to create variant pairs of the most obvious cases (e.g. LATIN SMALL LETTER A vs CYRILLIC SMALL LETTER A) but we are expected to ignore the more complex cases such as LATIN SMALL LETTER M vs CYRILLIC SMALL LETTER EM via LATIN CAPITAL LETTER M). The rational for that is that there will anyway be a process that will look at similarities between characters or candidate TLDs.<br clear="none"><br clear="none">If that process will have the resources to evaluate the more complex similarities without any prework by e.g. the relevant Generation Panel, then it will get all the obvious cases for free.<br clear="none"><br clear="none">What is our contribution if we are only to list the obvious cases that the IP already know? I feel it is almost meaningless.<br clear="none"><br clear="none"><br clear="none">Mats<br clear="none"><br clear="none">---<br clear="none">Mats Dufberg<br clear="none">DNS Specialist, IIS<br clear="none">Mobile: +46 73 065 3899<br clear="none"><a shape="rect" href="https://www.iis.se/en/" target="_blank">https://www.iis.se/en/</a><br clear="none"> <br clear="none"><br clear="none">-----Original Message-----<div class="yqt3104820116" id="yqtfd26507"><br clear="none">From: Latingp <<a shape="rect" ymailto="mailto:latingp-bounces@icann.org" href="mailto:latingp-bounces@icann.org">latingp-bounces@icann.org</a>> on behalf of Michael Bauland <<a shape="rect" ymailto="mailto:Michael.Bauland@knipp.de" href="mailto:Michael.Bauland@knipp.de">Michael.Bauland@knipp.de</a>><br clear="none">Date: Tuesday, 10 July 2018 at 10:59<br clear="none">To: Bill Jouris <<a shape="rect" ymailto="mailto:bill.jouris@insidethestack.com" href="mailto:bill.jouris@insidethestack.com">bill.jouris@insidethestack.com</a>>, Mirjana Tasić <<a shape="rect" ymailto="mailto:Mirjana.Tasic@rnids.rs" href="mailto:Mirjana.Tasic@rnids.rs">Mirjana.Tasic@rnids.rs</a>>, ICANN Latin GP <<a shape="rect" ymailto="mailto:latingp@icann.org" href="mailto:latingp@icann.org">latingp@icann.org</a>><br clear="none">Subject: Re: [Latingp] ODG: ODG: Variants -- Case for Considering Upper Case<br clear="none"><br clear="none">Hi Bill,<br clear="none"><br clear="none"><br clear="none">On 09.07.2018 19:11, Bill Jouris wrote:<br clear="none">> For example, suppose we decide that a Cyrillic Small Letter Em (м<br clear="none">> codepoint 043C) is NOT a variant of a Latin Small Letter M (m codepoint<br clear="none">> 006D). Then it is possible to create a (Cyrillic) TLD of .сом, because<br clear="none">> the last letter is visibly "different" from that in .com. <br clear="none"><br clear="none">as said earlier, I agree that having a TLD сом is definitely a problem<br clear="none">and should not be allowed. But independent from our variant rules, such<br clear="none">a TLD application would always be rejected.<br clear="none"><br clear="none">Therefore I agree with Mirjana: let's first concentrate on the task we<br clear="none">have to do and then later we can look at further work that is nice to have.<br clear="none"><br clear="none">Cheers,<br clear="none"><br clear="none">Michael<br clear="none"><br clear="none">-- <br clear="none">____________________________________________________________________<br clear="none"> | |<br clear="none"> | knipp | Knipp Medien und Kommunikation GmbH<br clear="none"> ------- Technologiepark<br clear="none"> Martin-Schmeisser-Weg 9<br clear="none"> 44227 Dortmund<br clear="none"> Germany<br clear="none"><br clear="none"> Dipl.-Informatiker Fon: +49 231 9703-0<br clear="none"> Fax: +49 231 9703-200<br clear="none"> Dr. Michael Bauland SIP: <a shape="rect" ymailto="mailto:Michael.Bauland@knipp.de" href="mailto:Michael.Bauland@knipp.de">Michael.Bauland@knipp.de</a><br clear="none"> Software Development E-mail: <a shape="rect" ymailto="mailto:Michael.Bauland@knipp.de" href="mailto:Michael.Bauland@knipp.de">Michael.Bauland@knipp.de</a><br clear="none"><br clear="none"> Register Court:<br clear="none"> Amtsgericht Dortmund, HRB 13728<br clear="none"><br clear="none"> Chief Executive Officers:<br clear="none"> Dietmar Knipp, Elmar Knipp</div><br clear="none">_______________________________________________<br clear="none">Latingp mailing list<br clear="none"><a shape="rect" ymailto="mailto:Latingp@icann.org" href="mailto:Latingp@icann.org">Latingp@icann.org</a><br clear="none"><a shape="rect" href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/latingp" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/latingp</a><div class="yqt3104820116" id="yqtfd71699"><br clear="none"><br clear="none"></div></div><br><br></div> </div> </div> </div></div></body></html>