Hi all<br><br>Following the queries on the list overnight, I have tried as best I can to piece together the language of the recommendations.The documents I checked against were
<a href="https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/21135832/Findings+-+conclusions+-+definitions.docx?version=1&modificationDate=1319625303000">https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/21135832/Findings+-+conclusions+-+definitions.docx?version=1&modificationDate=1319625303000</a>
(Draft Recommendations discussed in Dakar), and this
<a href="https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/21135832/Current+WRT+Recommendations+-+v1+-+Nov+21.doc?version=1&modificationDate=1321978947000">https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/21135832/Current+WRT+Recommendations+-+v1+-+Nov+21.doc?version=1&modificationDate=1321978947000</a>
(The first consolidated draft of what was agreed in Dakar, and MdR).<br><br clear="all">However, like others, I have found it confusing to understand from the multiple drafts posted on the private WIKI, but I do think the draft of 21 November (second link above) is a fair representation of what we as a team negotiated and agreed.<br>
<br>I have gone back to text that we agreed in MdR and Dakar, and tried only to add text in the following circumstances:<br><br>- Where the sense was unclear, or we were tasking the wrong people<br>- Where the text has evolved through consent of the team since Dakar (IDNs and Proxies)<br>
- Where the text has come from another, stable source (compliance recommendation on WDRP). There, as the author and having received a comment from James on the correct parties to task, I have cleaned up the language.<br>
<br>I hope I have done a fair job on this.<br><br>I have noted one place (privacy recs.) where there is contested language. My proposal - sorry James - is that we revert to our agreed text from Dakar on this.<br><br>If I have made mistakes on the source language, I apologise, this is not intentional and I am happy to be corrected. <br>
<br>Please carefully consider these recommendations. They can be improved, the language could be better, clearer, but they are what we agreed. Please let me have any show stoppers by 1600 UTC.<br><br>Kind regards<br><br>
Emily<br><br><br>-- <br><br><br><span style="color:rgb(153, 51, 153)"></span> <img src="http://www.etlaw.co.uk/images/stories/etlaw/etclogo250x60.gif"><br><br><div style="margin-left:80px"><u style="color:rgb(204, 51, 204)"> </u><br style="color:rgb(153, 51, 153)">
<br><span style="color:rgb(153, 153, 153)">76 Temple Road, Oxford OX4 2EZ UK</span><br style="color:rgb(153, 153, 153)"><span style="color:rgb(153, 153, 153)">t: +44 (0)1865 582 811 • m: +44 (0)7540 049 322</span><br style="color:rgb(153, 153, 153)">
<span style="color:rgb(153, 153, 153)"><a href="mailto:emily@emilytaylor.eu" target="_blank">emily@emilytaylor.eu</a> </span><br style="color:rgb(153, 153, 153)"><br style="color:rgb(153, 153, 153)"><b style="color:rgb(153, 153, 153)"><a href="http://www.etlaw.co.uk" target="_blank">www.etlaw.co.uk</a></b><br style="color:rgb(153, 153, 153)">
<br style="color:rgb(153, 153, 153)"><span style="color:rgb(153, 153, 153)">Emily Taylor Consultancy Limited is a company registered in England and Wales No. 730471. VAT No. 114487713.</span><br></div><br>