<html xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Helvetica Neue";}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
p.MsoListParagraph, li.MsoListParagraph, div.MsoListParagraph
{mso-style-priority:34;
margin-top:0in;
margin-right:0in;
margin-bottom:0in;
margin-left:.5in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
p.msonormal0, li.msonormal0, div.msonormal0
{mso-style-name:msonormal;
mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
p.ydp17a82f68yiv9230238646msonormal, li.ydp17a82f68yiv9230238646msonormal, div.ydp17a82f68yiv9230238646msonormal
{mso-style-name:ydp17a82f68yiv9230238646msonormal;
mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
span.EmailStyle20
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
span.EmailStyle22
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
span.EmailStyle23
{mso-style-type:personal-compose;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
/* List Definitions */
@list l0
{mso-list-id:609319206;
mso-list-type:hybrid;
mso-list-template-ids:245005086 67698703 67698713 67698715 67698703 67698713 67698715 67698703 67698713 67698715;}
@list l0:level1
{mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level2
{mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level3
{mso-level-number-format:roman-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:right;
text-indent:-9.0pt;}
@list l0:level4
{mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level5
{mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level6
{mso-level-number-format:roman-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:right;
text-indent:-9.0pt;}
@list l0:level7
{mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level8
{mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level9
{mso-level-number-format:roman-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:right;
text-indent:-9.0pt;}
ol
{margin-bottom:0in;}
ul
{margin-bottom:0in;}
--></style></head><body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal>Dear Latin GP members,<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>May I suggest an option for the GP members to consider to keep moving forward – is it possible to split this discussion into two parts: <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><ol style='margin-top:0in' start=1 type=1><li class=MsoListParagraph style='margin-left:0in;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1'>The first would be to focus on the agreed upon methods, complete the remaining analysis and share the version of Latin LGR proposal for review by IP. <o:p></o:p></li></ol><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><ol style='margin-top:0in' start=2 type=1><li class=MsoListParagraph style='margin-left:0in;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1'>In parallel, include any items which are not agreed by members in a separately maintained list, to be revisited for further discussion after completing step 1. This may actually be a very small list.<o:p></o:p></li></ol><p class=MsoListParagraph><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>This can help make progress while allowing to address any items the members consider may require more discussion. IP may also be consulted for such cases.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Regards,<br>Sarmad<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'><p class=MsoNormal><b>From:</b> Latingp <latingp-bounces@icann.org> <b>On Behalf Of </b>Tan Tanaka, Dennis via Latingp<br><b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, February 26, 2019 4:38 AM<br><b>To:</b> meikal@mumin.de; latingp@icann.org; bill.jouris@insidethestack.com<br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [Latingp] Work Product Quality<o:p></o:p></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif'>The data was that we had votes from two users of languages, which make use of diaresis, both of which judged them confusable, namely me and Michael Bauland<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'>Thus far, it is only your opinion of such confusability. We have not seen evidence that support your claims (again, other than your verbal statements). At the outset, this is fine to start looking at this case closer (which we have), but if we want to make a case for variant relationship on non-visual grounds, then let’s back it up with such evidence. All we heard on our last call was about comparing two characters on visual grounds using rare fonts. So, if we are making a visual argument, let’s use our visual methodology. If we want to support a variant relationship on semantic, interchangeability or other grounds we are going to be asked for this hard evidence. We haven’t seen it yet.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'>When it was suggested we do the analysis using wordmark it, the thesis was to find out -among several font types- whether hand-writing conventions were transferred to font design. In the case of “a” with diaresis and double acute, we saw there is no confusion; a diaresis is always a diaresis and a double acute is a double acute.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica Neue"'>What I suggest the panel do is remain open to the possibility (I would say the certainty) that we have not yet created methodologies which will identify all variants. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal> But we define what variants are, not the other way around.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='text-indent:.5in'>We designed a method for visual analysis. Is it limited? Yes. But we chose widely-used, stable font types reflecting different styles to capture alternative renderings. We accepted this design knowing its shortcomings. I don’t think it is productive to challenge this decision at this point in time.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='text-indent:.5in'>Let us remember that we need to focus on clear-cut cases and leave subjectivity to the visual similarity process.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='text-indent:.5in'>-Dennis<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><b><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>From: </span></b><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>Latingp <<a href="mailto:latingp-bounces@icann.org">latingp-bounces@icann.org</a>> on behalf of Meikal Mumin <<a href="mailto:meikal@mumin.de">meikal@mumin.de</a>><br><b>Date: </b>Monday, February 25, 2019 at 1:57 PM<br><b>To: </b>Latin GP <<a href="mailto:latingp@icann.org">latingp@icann.org</a>>, Bill Jouris <<a href="mailto:bill.jouris@insidethestack.com">bill.jouris@insidethestack.com</a>><br><b>Subject: </b>[EXTERNAL] Re: [Latingp] Work Product Quality<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div name=messageBodySection><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif'>Dear colleagues,<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif'>To chime into this discussion - I tend to agree with Bill in that the data is always more important the theory. Our methodologies are based on certain hypotheses. If these turn out to be insufficient, the solution is not to ignore the data but to amend the methodology and change the hypothesis and those are very basic principles of scientific analysis and methods. Nonetheless I find this last exchange of emails a bit unspecific and would suggest focusing on the actual data, rather than having abstract methodological debates:<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif'>I assume that Bill’s email makes reference to the discussions we had regarding the cases of double diaresis vs. double acute during our last teleconference. If I remember correctly the gist of the line of argumentation by Dennis was that us considering them variants was not possible, because our reasons were based on visual similarity, while we were discussing non-visual similarity at this time.<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif'>The data was that we had votes from two users of languages, which make use of diaresis, both of which judged them confusable, namely me and Michael Bauland. We had several examples from fonts where they were near-homoglyphs if not homoglyphs to use established terminology (without implying a categrorial notion of visual vs. non-visual similarity). Now Dennis argued that if we would make them variants because they were near-homoglyphs or homoglyphs, we would have to restrain ourselves to the rendering in the same three fonts we had opted for earlier in our analysis of cross-script visual variants.<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif'>In this context, I would like to remind the group of two facts:<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif'>1) We have not yet conducted an analysis of in-script variants on strictly visual grounds. With cross-script variants we started with a visual analysis, and then during that work discovered that we had to consider further non-visual criteria. This led us to developing the current theories and framework of how to identify non-visual criteria. We went on to amend our visual analysis in the case of cross-script variants and then proceed with an analysis of in-script variants.<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif'>Accordingly, we haven’t had an analysis of in-script variants on strictly visual grounds as of yet. So, either that task remains, or we do a combined pass analyzing both aspects together, and the latter seems the obvious choice to me.<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif'>2) As I tried to explain in the proposal itself, there is no systematic, non-arbitrary boundary between visual and non-visual similarity - One conditions the other and vice versa. Therefore, in my opinion we should not try to enforce such a boundary, neither from the point of analysis nor from the point of methodology.<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif'>We started with a visual analysis of cross-script variant candidates because that is what was expected from us, as clarified by the Integration Panel on various occasions. However, we cannot abuse these statements to deduct that - by consequence - other things are out of scope and I’m confident that an incomplete analysis will not be accepted by the Integration Panel.<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif'>Therefore, the relevant question in our discussion will be if there is a succinct risk for stability, rather that which type of variant relationship a particular case falls into and whether we applied the correct methodology.<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif'>In the case under discussion I interpret the data to substantiate such a risk for stability simply because users would confuse them for whatever reasons. We should however stick to discussing the data rather than arguing over methodology, because it is such arguments which keep us from making progress, not the quality or quantity of the data.<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif'>I hope this summary will speed up our discussion during our next tele-conference, but even if it does not settle the discussion it is important that we *cannot* rule out any analysis because of any methodology developed before analyzing the data. <o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><div name=messageSignatureSection><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><o:p> </o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'>Best,<span style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif'><br><br></span>Meikal<o:p></o:p></p></div></div><div name=messageReplySection><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif'>Am 23. Feb. 2019, 18:44 +0100 schrieb Bill Jouris <<a href="mailto:bill.jouris@insidethestack.com">bill.jouris@insidethestack.com</a>>:<o:p></o:p></span></p><blockquote style='border:none;border-left:solid #1ABC9C 1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 8.0pt;margin-left:3.75pt;margin-top:3.75pt;margin-right:3.75pt;margin-bottom:3.75pt'><div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica Neue"'>Dennis, <o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica Neue"'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica Neue"'>I'm not saying that the methodologies we have developed are flawed. I am saying that they are <i>limited</i>. <o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica Neue"'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica Neue"'>There is some set of code points which are variants. Each methodology we have can identify some subset of those variants -- but not all of them. That is, after all, why we have developed multiple methodologies. <span style='color:black'>Our task, I submit, is not to process our methodologies; our task is to identify variants. The methodologies are a means to that end; they are not the end itself. </span><o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica Neue"'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica Neue"'>I believe we need to bear in mind that the methodologies which we have at this point may still not be sufficient to identify all of the variants which exist. We need to accept that, if we find code points which we generally agree are variants, but which are not identified by our existing methodologies, that is not a bad thing. It would be good to then identify why they are variants, in the interests of then finding others of the same type; to develop an additional methodology. Good, but not critical. <o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica Neue"'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica Neue"'>The quality of our work product is determined by how successfully we identify the variants which exist. If we find variants which are not generated by our methodologies, that improves the quality of our work. It does not, as you appeared to suggest, diminish it. <o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica Neue"'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica Neue"'>What I suggest the panel do is remain open to the possibility (I would say the certainty) that we have not yet created methodologies which will identify all variants. At some point, of course, we do have to stop. But that doesn't justify just saying "These code points do not fit the existing methodologies, so we cannot even consider them." Again, the methodologies are a tool, not an end.<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica Neue"'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica Neue"'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica Neue"'>Bill Jouris<br>Inside Products<br><a href="mailto:bill.jouris@insidethestack.com">bill.jouris@insidethestack.com</a><br>831-659-8360<br>925-855-9512 (direct)<o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica Neue"'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica Neue"'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div></div><div id="ydp17a82f68yahoo_quoted_1245104190"><div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica Neue";color:#26282A'>On Friday, February 22, 2019, 10:23:19 AM PST, Tan Tanaka, Dennis <<a href="mailto:dtantanaka@verisign.com">dtantanaka@verisign.com</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica Neue";color:#26282A'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica Neue";color:#26282A'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><div id=ydp17a82f68yiv9230238646><div><div><p class=ydp17a82f68yiv9230238646msonormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica Neue";color:#26282A'>Bill,<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=ydp17a82f68yiv9230238646msonormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica Neue";color:#26282A'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=ydp17a82f68yiv9230238646msonormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica Neue";color:#26282A'>I don’t see how the methods this panel have developed and signed-off on (some of them over a year ago) misalign with our goal.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=ydp17a82f68yiv9230238646msonormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica Neue";color:#26282A'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=ydp17a82f68yiv9230238646msonormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica Neue";color:#26282A'>What exactly are you suggesting this panel to do?<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=ydp17a82f68yiv9230238646msonormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica Neue";color:#26282A'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=ydp17a82f68yiv9230238646msonormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica Neue";color:#26282A'>-Dennis<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=ydp17a82f68yiv9230238646msonormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica Neue";color:#26282A'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><div id=ydp17a82f68yiv9230238646yqt92251><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'><p class=ydp17a82f68yiv9230238646msonormal style='margin-left:1.0in'><b><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica Neue";color:black'>From:</span></b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica Neue";color:#26282A'> </span><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica Neue";color:black'>Latingp <<a href="mailto:latingp-bounces@icann.org">latingp-bounces@icann.org</a>> on behalf of Bill Jouris <<a href="mailto:bill.jouris@insidethestack.com">bill.jouris@insidethestack.com</a>><br><b>Reply-To:</b> Bill Jouris <<a href="mailto:bill.jouris@insidethestack.com">bill.jouris@insidethestack.com</a>><br><b>Date:</b> Thursday, February 21, 2019 at 5:36 PM<br><b>To:</b> Latin GP <<a href="mailto:latingp@icann.org">latingp@icann.org</a>><br><b>Subject:</b> [EXTERNAL] [Latingp] Work Product Quality</span><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica Neue";color:#26282A'><o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=ydp17a82f68yiv9230238646msonormal style='margin-left:1.0in'><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica Neue";color:#26282A'> <o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><div id=ydp17a82f68yiv9230238646ydpc1b8a037yiv0434286997><div id="ydp17a82f68yiv9230238646ydpc1b8a037yiv0434286997yMail_cursorElementTracker_1550769559181"><p class=ydp17a82f68yiv9230238646msonormal style='margin-left:1.0in'><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica Neue";color:#26282A'>Dear colleagues, </span><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica Neue";color:#26282A'><o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div id="ydp17a82f68yiv9230238646ydpc1b8a037yiv0434286997yMail_cursorElementTracker_1550769568898"><p class=ydp17a82f68yiv9230238646msonormal style='margin-left:1.0in'><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica Neue";color:#26282A'> </span><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica Neue";color:#26282A'><o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div id="ydp17a82f68yiv9230238646ydpc1b8a037yiv0434286997yMail_cursorElementTracker_1550769569135"><p class=ydp17a82f68yiv9230238646msonormal style='margin-left:1.0in'><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica Neue";color:#26282A'>I want to strongly disagree with the thesis put forward at this morning's meeting that the quality of our work product depends on our following some very small number of discrete methodologies for identifying variants. It does not. </span><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica Neue";color:#26282A'><o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div id="ydp17a82f68yiv9230238646ydpc1b8a037yiv0434286997yMail_cursorElementTracker_1550769656752"><p class=ydp17a82f68yiv9230238646msonormal style='margin-left:1.0in'><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica Neue";color:#26282A'> </span><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica Neue";color:#26282A'><o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div id="ydp17a82f68yiv9230238646ydpc1b8a037yiv0434286997yMail_cursorElementTracker_1550769656931"><p class=ydp17a82f68yiv9230238646msonormal style='margin-left:1.0in'><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica Neue";color:#26282A'>A methodology, any methodology, is merely a tool. Its purpose is to help us get to our goal -- identifying variants. If we use multiple methodologies, each of which allows us to identify some (quite possibly overlapping) subset of the universe of variants, that's OK. If we identify a few additional cases that we believe to be variants, while going outside those methodologies, that's OK too. It is desirable to have methodologies which identify large subsets, but <i>only</i> because that expedites our work. The methodologies are a means to an end, not the end in themselves. </span><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica Neue";color:#26282A'><o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div id="ydp17a82f68yiv9230238646ydpc1b8a037yiv0434286997yMail_cursorElementTracker_1550769857286"><p class=ydp17a82f68yiv9230238646msonormal style='margin-left:1.0in'><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica Neue";color:#26282A'> </span><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica Neue";color:#26282A'><o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div id="ydp17a82f68yiv9230238646ydpc1b8a037yiv0434286997yMail_cursorElementTracker_1550769857497"><p class=ydp17a82f68yiv9230238646msonormal style='margin-left:1.0in'><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica Neue";color:#26282A'>The quality of our work product is based on how successfully we identify the members of the underlying universe of variants. How we get there is really irrelevant to the quality of what we produce.</span><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica Neue";color:#26282A'><o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div id=ydp17a82f68yiv9230238646ydpc1b8a037yiv0434286997><p class=ydp17a82f68yiv9230238646msonormal style='margin-left:1.0in'><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica Neue";color:#26282A'> </span><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica Neue";color:#26282A'><o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div id=ydp17a82f68yiv9230238646ydpc1b8a037yiv0434286997><p class=ydp17a82f68yiv9230238646msonormal style='margin-left:1.0in'><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica Neue";color:#26282A'> </span><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica Neue";color:#26282A'><o:p></o:p></span></p></div><p class=ydp17a82f68yiv9230238646msonormal style='margin-left:1.0in'><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica Neue";color:#26282A'>Bill Jouris </span><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica Neue";color:#26282A'><o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div id=ydp17a82f68yiv9230238646ydpc1b8a037yiv0434286997><p class=ydp17a82f68yiv9230238646msonormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:5.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:1.0in'><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica Neue";color:#26282A'> </span><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica Neue";color:#26282A'><o:p></o:p></span></p><div id="ydp17a82f68yiv9230238646ydpc1b8a037yiv0434286997ymail_android_signature"><p class=ydp17a82f68yiv9230238646msonormal style='margin-left:1.0in'><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica Neue";color:#26282A'><a href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__go.onelink.me_107872968-3Fpid-3DInProduct-26c-3DGlobal-5FInternal-5FYGrowth-5FAndroidEmailSig-5F-5FAndroidUsers-26af-5Fwl-3Dym-26af-5Fsub1-3DInternal-26af-5Fsub2-3DGlobal-5FYGrowth-26af-5Fsub3-3DEmailSignature&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=KTETvEaGPwPcawI-QmNa-kiv-ZBvdgyyLm-mxd028M4&m=UzBRHrOObz2ODyc0MW_NuMVBMNhacRrliymOyQoUtLI&s=_FpsBtEG5lcsg6W72cXbKlXIXOzwvAhNtC1nZ1_QW5k&e=" target="_blank">Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android [go.onelink.me]</a></span><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica Neue";color:#26282A'><o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif'>_______________________________________________<br>Latingp mailing list<br><a href="mailto:Latingp@icann.org">Latingp@icann.org</a><br><a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/latingp">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/latingp</a><o:p></o:p></span></p></blockquote></div></div></body></html>