Hong, thank you. if you think it is enough that this issue has been raised at GNSO IDN WG Report making our position clear we might not need to do it in this public forum but should add it to our report under the section IDN. Best Greetings Annette ----- Original Message ----- From: "Hong Xue" <hongxueipr@gmail.com> To: "Annette Muehlberg" <annette.muehlberg@web.de> Cc: <alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org> Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2008 10:03 AM Subject: Re: [At-Large] ALAC statement for Public Forum
Annette,
In the working group on IDNs we also pointed out that there is no such thing as translated / equivalent skripts to excisting TLDs - registries do not have automatic entitlement to expressions of their names to IDNs.
This issue has been raised at GNSO IDN WG Report. It was under the discussion on confusing similarity--namely, whether semantic similarity (including but not limited to meaningful similarity) should be excluded from IDN gTLDs. I, as the ALAC Liaison, voiced very strongly on this issue. My opinion was eventually recorded into the Report. So, now you can see that only visual and phonetic similarity will be considered. Thus, translation of ASCII gTLD is not even supported at the GNSO. Is this still a very big concern in user community?
Of course, I'm very OK to reiterate this at the Forum.
Hong
Many gtld Registries contends
On 2/15/08, Annette Muehlberg <annette.muehlberg@web.de> wrote:
Thank you very much for putting this together - at night. It is really great fun to attend an ICANN Meeting when they turn off the internet access right after the official meeting at 18:30. Great working conditions.
In the working group on IDNs we also pointed out that there is no such thing as translated / equivalent skripts to excisting TLDs - registries do not have automatic entitlement to expressions of their names to IDNs.
I think that ALAC and RALOs agree on that position and it would be good if we could point that out in the public forum as a joint statement. Any objections?
It would be great if you could reply within the next hour, so we can state this in the public forum - otherwise we could add it to the report later after our meeting tonight .
best Annette
----- Original Message ----- From: <cheryl@hovtek.com.au> To: <alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org> Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2008 2:58 AM Subject: Re: [At-Large] ALAC statement for Public Forum
The aggrigated contributions from all contributers with a few extra general introducion bits is (temporarily) up on our Wiki at https://st.icann.org/alac/index.cgi?at_large_advisory_committee
Temprarilly because after it is given any final tweeks and presented it will become a linked page from where it is now but I wanted to minimise clicks to find for tomorrow...
CLO
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org
At-Large Official Site: http://www.alac.icann.org ALAC Independent: http://www.icannalac.org
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org
At-Large Official Site: http://www.alac.icann.org ALAC Independent: http://www.icannalac.org
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org
At-Large Official Site: http://www.alac.icann.org ALAC Independent: http://www.icannalac.org