[vip] Suggested meta-questions to think about

[Dr.Sarmad Hussain]

Ok, given we have some agreement on what is a variant and not, we have to
> discuss what implications it has. I here also see a number of different
> questions to be answered. For example:
>
> B.1. Should an application with more TLDs than one be counted as one
> application if the TLDs in the application are variants of each other? And
> if so, should there be only one fee per application?
> B.2. Should two different variants be able to be managed by two different
> registries or not, and if not, what should happen with the variants? One
> primary and others like the bundling tactics in some TLDs (i.e. choice
> between "yes delegation" or "just block for other to register")?
>


Here is another way to look at this:

B.1. if variants are needed for resolution due to script, language and
cultural factors or due to the "accidents" of encoding and/or localization
(e.g KB variation) in the past, it is not really the fault of the applicant
of a TLD.  So why should the applicant pay for the extra variant strings?
 If Unicode encoded two A's, A1 and A2, both of which looked exactly alike,
should a TLD applicant be expected to pay for A1pple separately from A2pple
if both strings rendered indistinguishably as "Apple" to users and half the
users had A1 on their keyboards and others had A2 thus generating both
versions of encodings for the same string.

Of course, one could always argue that ICANN does not insure against
"natural" calamities, tough luck!!!  But what would be fair?

B.2. if variants are needed for blocking (which means that the applicant
really does not need it for usability reasons, but for preventing it to
be registered by somebody else) they should be paid by the applicant.
 Interestingly this logic will push for more (instead of less) delegations,
which seems counter intuitive, if one looks at it from operational view
point.

B.3 There could also be another motivation for blocking, which is to prevent
malicious use thus securing the users. If this is the need and motivation
behind blocking, the extra TLDs should not be charged (thinking mark
variation in Arabic).

A sub-categoraization of A.1.x... is needed to address how variants may be
categorized in B.1-B1.3 above.

regards,
Sarmad
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/vip/attachments/20110621/4308fd55/attachment.html