[Gnso-epdp-idn-team] order of variant activation / "primary" label

[Ceo-Nixi]

I agree with Michael. We need to have further discussions. 
Anil

Sent from my iPhone

> On 18-Sep-2022, at 11:29 AM, Michael.Bauland at knipp.de wrote:
> 
> Dear colleagues,
> 
> at the end of yesterday's call, we had a short discussion about the order of variant activation, which we did not have enough time to conclude. I would like to quickly summarise the argument, which I wanted to make. I think we should continue the discussion in one of the next calls, whenever it fits best.
> 
> Due to the fact that variant dispositions are different, depending on which label you start with, it makes a big difference, which label you register first (if you don't want to register all at the same time).
> 
> Take the real life example of the Turkish brand "*Yapı Kredi*". They are currently using the domain yapikredi.com.tr.
> Let's say, they would like to apply for their own TLD. For internationalisation reasons, they would like to start with ASCII version .yapikredi as a TLD string. Several years later, they would like to also register their variant TLD with the correct spelling: .yapıkredi. That's not possible, because it's a blocked variant.
> 
> As a consequence, they will have to start with registering the TLD .yapıkredi, even if they do not want to use it directly, just to make sure, they don't lock themselves out of using it at all.
> 
> The question is, how should such a use case be accommodated best? I see two possibilities:
> 1. Apply for both TLDs at the same time .yapıkredi and .yapikredi, but only activate the second one, keeping the first one inactive for years.
> 2. Apply for .yapikredi, but state in the application that the "main" TLD should be .yapıkredi, even though it's not applied for yet.
> 
> The first approach is the simpler one, but it might incur unnecessary cost as the applicant is not sure, whether they ever want to activate the second label. The second approach would require that each application needs to define a "primary" or "main" or "starting" label, however we want to call it. I personally would support Option 2 as that would also avoid some potential inconsistencies, when a variant TLD gets retired.
> 
> Similar examples also exist for other scripts, not just Latin.
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Michael
> _______________________________________________
> Gnso-epdp-idn-team mailing list
> Gnso-epdp-idn-team at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-epdp-idn-team