[Rt4-whois] Request for redline version

[Emily Taylor]

Hi there

Just to be clear what I'm proposing, Lynn

I don't propose that we publish our working discussions, merely the
differences between our two public documents.  This is similar to what was
done by ICANN for the various versions of the gTLD applicant guidebook.  I
found it very helpful because if you have read the whole document once, you
can then concentrate on what has changed.

So, it's just highlighting differences in the two published texts.

Kind regards

Emily

On 17 May 2012 13:16, <lynn at goodsecurityconsulting.com> wrote:

> If we have the discretion to decline this request, it seems like
> unnecessary work to me.
> The principle that we have emphasized is that this is a consensus based
> output and we did work hard to achieve that.  and we have followed all the
> transparency practices as we progressed.
> Lynn
>
> Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Emily Taylor <emily at emilytaylor.eu>
> Sender: rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org
> Date: Thu, 17 May 2012 08:27:09
> To: <rt4-whois at icann.org>
> Subject: [Rt4-whois] Request for redline version
>
> _______________________________________________
> Rt4-whois mailing list
> Rt4-whois at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rt4-whois
>
>
>


-- 




*
*

76 Temple Road, Oxford OX4 2EZ UK
t: +44 (0)1865 582 811 • m: +44 (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. 7630471. VAT No. 114487713.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20120517/ee8ff8b9/attachment.html