<html><head></head><body style="zoom: 0%;"><div dir="auto">I think the procedure of the retirement needs to have a check for the existence of the primary and if not - election of the new one.<br><br></div>
<div dir="auto"><!-- tmjah_g_1299s -->Maxim Alzoba<!-- tmjah_g_1299e --></div>
<div class="gmail_quote" >On Jul 26, 2022, at 09:42, Michael Bauland <<a href="mailto:michael.bauland@knipp.de" target="_blank">michael.bauland@knipp.de</a>> wrote:<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
<pre class="blue">Hi Dennis,<br><br>On 25.07.2022 21:46, Tan Tanaka, Dennis via Gnso-epdp-idn-team wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #729fcf; padding-left: 1ex;"> A few additional comments on 2.3 re: use of “primary label”<br> <br> * Some questions I reckon we will face throughout: what is the<br> “primary” label? what function does it serve? should we use such<br> nomenclature? … some background notes:<br> * When we talk about variants in a set, it is important to note which<br> of all labels is the source for variant label calculation, or as we<br> have adopted: the primary label. As a way of context, first, the<br> variant relationship between two code points must satisfy the<br> symmetrical property (there are other properties, but not relevant<br> to this topic). This means, if ‘A’ is a variant of ‘B’, then ‘B’ is<br> a variant of ‘A’. Second, any variant relationship is also assigned<br> a disposition value: allocatable or blocked. The disposition value<br> is unidirectional. Which means, a variant relationship could yield<br> an ‘allocatable’ variant in one direction (e.g., AàB: allocatable),<br> but a ‘blocked’ variant in the other direction (e.g., BàA: blocked).<br> These rules are encoded in the LGR.<br> * As we progress in our deliberations about the lifecycle of gTLDs it<br> is important to understand (and remember) how the various variant<br> labels and disposition values came to be (to discern which ones are<br> allocatable/withheld or blocked). However, I believe we need to<br> remain open (or at least give thoughtful consideration) to cases<br> where one TLD label in the set needs to be handled separately e.g.,<br> retirement, and the implications of this one change applies to the<br> rest of the labels in the set. For instance, what if the registry<br> operator wants to retire the “primary” label and continue to operate<br> the rest of variants. In this case, it would be unwise, perhaps, to<br> re-assign the attribute of “primary” to another label in the set,<br> because that might change the profile of the set as a whole (of<br> course, this would depend what “primary” means and how it is used).<br></blockquote><br>This is a very good point. Especially with asymmetric disposition we <br>have a real problem if a primary label is retired and the other variants <br>are kept. There might arise a situation in which none of the remaining <br>variants can be made primary, because it would entail one of the other <br>existing variants to become blocked instead of allocatable.<br><br>The question would then be<br>* Do we allow a variant set to exist without a primary label?<br>* Will retiring a primary label require the registry to select another <br>primary label and thereby possibly force them to retire other variants <br>together with the former primary label?<br><br>Take the following quite simple example.<br>Applied for primary label: bıß<br>Allocatable Variants: biß, bıss, biss<br><br>So, someone might have all four labels in the Root zone at some point.<br><br>If they now retire the primary label bıß, the other three labels could <br>not exist at the time (without bıß also existing).<br><br>Case 1:<br>biß is made new primary<br>Consequence: bıss becomes a blocked variant.<br><br>Case 2:<br>bıss is made new primary<br>Consequence: biß becomes a blocked variant.<br><br>Case 3:<br>biss is made a new primary<br>Consequence: both bıss and biß become blocked variants.<br><br><br>Even though the example is not very likely, it's certainly possible and <br>in other scripts might be similar examples that are more likely.<br><br><br>So, to summarise my points:<br>* Initially, we need a primary label to determine the disposition value <br>of all variants.<br>* Retiring a primary label may cause problems and we need to decide how <br>to deal with these problems.<br><br>Best regards,<br><br>Michael<br><br></pre></blockquote></div></body></html>