[IRT.RegDataPolicy] [Ext] Edits to One Doc

[Dennis Chang]

Thanks Laureen for the suggestion.
I’ve received same suggestion from others so please don’t feel as you are in a unique situation.

When we were working with smaller individual documents, the way were doing it was efficient.

Now that we have a larger document and many more people are commenting, I believe that your suggested way will work better for us.
This way we are always clear on what the “baseline” is.

This is very important as the GNSO Council Liaison he is monitoring the IRT’s level of agreement or separation.
Remember that IRT’s main role is to determine if the proposed implementation is consistent with the recommendation.

There are countless ways to implement and we will defer on the ways of preference.
This shouldn’t be confused with a “better.”
Especially, as we move closer to public comment.

The Public Comment version may lack perfection in language but if we can convey the implementation approach clearly, we can proceed.
Please note that the IRT work will continue with detail work during the public comment period.

Tomorrow, we’ll have a brief discussion about this but without a strong objection from anyone, I will change the collaboration methodology as suggested by Lauren here.

Thanks
Dennis Chang

From: "Kapin, Laureen" <LKAPIN at ftc.gov>
Date: Tuesday, November 19, 2019 at 14:02
To: "IRT.RegDataPolicy at icann.org" <irt.regdatapolicy at icann.org>
Cc: Dennis Chang <dennis.chang at icann.org>
Subject: [Ext] Edits to One Doc

Hi folks,

I’m finding it a bit challenging when reviewing the one doc (Google doc).  In particular, while some folks edit via comments, others edit the document directly.  Is there a convention we’re supposed to follow?  In other ICANN WGs folks are encouraged NOT to edit the document directly but rather give input via comments.  In part, using the comment function is preferred because otherwise it’s difficult to identify the editor.

Might we discuss some agreed upon ground rules going forward?  Thanks and apologies if I’ve missed prior discussions on this issue.
  Sent via phone.
  Please excuse typos and/or
  unintended auto-correct outcomes.

Laureen Kapin, Counsel
Int’l Consumer Protection
Federal Trade Commission





-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/irt.regdatapolicy/attachments/20191119/ee805052/attachment.html>