[Rt4-whois] Final version - proof-read

[Sarmad Hussain]

Dear Alice,

 

Two typos in the IDN section:

 

1.       Ideosyncratic à idiosyncratic;   though I would suggest using
“arbitrary” instead

2.       Footnote should be “Available at http://...”   In the edit, “at” is
missing.

 

Regards,
Sarmad

 

 

From: rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org [mailto:rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org] On
Behalf Of Emily Taylor
Sent: Saturday, December 03, 2011 7:28 PM
To: rt4-whois at icann.org
Subject: [Rt4-whois] Final version - proof-read

 

Hi all

I attach a mark up showing my final edits to the Draft Report, which we will
be publishing on Monday.

You can see my changes.  They are mainly correction of typos, adding a
couple of footnote references, and making sure that we are using terms
consistently.  I also split the report into three parts (Part I: Scope and
definitions; Part II - WHOIS Policy and implementation and Part III - the
extent to which WHOIS policy and its implementation are effective in meeting
stakeholder needs).  I found that this made it easier to see how the pieces
of the jigsaw fit together.

There are a couple of more substantive changes:

1. Recommendations - As agreed on the list, I have unhighlighted (ie
confirmed) the best practices recommendations re proxies, and inserted the
introductory text proposed by Susan and amended by me.
2. Recommendations - given the late controversy on whether the interface
should be for all gTLDs or just thin ones, I have put in two alternatives
for public comment, as proposed by Peter, and have added a sentence near the
introductory text on proxies.
3. Recommendations - Lutz's add on consumer outreach I have added into the
paragraph below where it was - I am unaware of any opposition to this
addition, or even when it was made, so shout if you have objections.
4. Recommendations - A few days ago, given the discussion of the words
"registrar-operated" in recommendation 10, I proposed their deletion.  I
heard no opposition, and have deleted them. 
5.The order of the chapter on implementation (which I wrote) I found
annoying, and not sufficiently clear because it has suffered from being
moved back and forth from the main report to the more detailed letter in the
appendix.  I have therefore made a few changes there, which are marked up.
These should be uncontentious - the aim is to explain what's going on rather
than introduce substantive changes. 

Please give any final final edits to me and Alice/ circulated to the list by
the end of the weekend. 

Alice -- you will see that I've managed to muck up some of the formatting
(in particular I could not get the title for PART III to appear on the same
page as the next chapter heading, so gave up).  Please can you also update
the table of contents.  On Monday, if no more comments have been made,
please accept all the marked up changes, and publish the draft report.

I will also forward an outline of our proposed cover note/ request for
comment.

Kind regards

Emily

-- 


     <http://www.etlaw.co.uk/images/stories/etlaw/etclogo250x60.gif> 

 


76 Temple Road, Oxford OX4 2EZ UK
t: +44 (0)1865 582 <tel:%2B44%20%280%291865%20582%20811>  811 • m: +44
<tel:%2B44%20%280%297540%20049%20322>  (0)7540 049 322
emily at emilytaylor.eu 

www.etlaw.co.uk

Emily Taylor Consultancy Limited is a company registered in England and
Wales No. 730471. VAT No. 114487713.

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20111204/8c9fddc4/attachment.html