Works for me can the ALAC consider it posted haste I wonder... On Sep 28, 2012 1:26 PM, "Rinalia Abdul Rahim" <rinalia.abdulrahim@gmail.com> wrote:

Hello everyone,

Please find below a draft statement on the IDNccTLD String selection. The statement is meant to be short, commends the work and addresses the variants issue. Comments for fine tuning or addressing gaps are welcome.

Best regards,

Rinalia

* *

* *

*DRAFT *

*ALAC Statement on the Draft IDN ccTLD String Selection Criteria, Requirements and Processes Policy Recommendations*

The At-Large Advisory Committee (ALAC) commends the International Domain Names (IDN) country code Policy Development Process Working Group 1 for the comprehensiveness of its draft policy recommendations on the IDN ccTLD String Selection Criteria, Requirements and Processes for territories listed in the ISO 3166-1 list. We note that the recommendations are based on the previous work of the IDNC Working Group and we are pleased to see that the recommendations reflect the learning drawn from the implementation of the IDNccTLD Fast Track Process over the past few years.

We wish to reiterate the significance and importance of IDNs, including IDN Top Level Domains (TLDs) at both the generic and country code levels. We believe that IDNs are crucial for enhancing diversity and multilingualism on the Internet.

We observe that the draft recommendations do not address the issue of variant TLDs and instead contain a placeholder in Section J, which points out that issues pertaining to the management of such TLDs are still being discussed in the ICANN community and will be added later.

We believe that the draft recommendations should indicate that the issue of variants is urgent and need to be addressed in a timely manner. Concurrently, the draft recommendations should also affirm that the outcomes of the variants discussion pertaining to the Label Generation Ruleset (LGR) for the Root Zone would be binding and applicable to all TLDs (including ccTLDs), given that the overarching principle of the LGR process is the security and stability of the Root Zone, which is shared by all Internet users.

END _______________________________________________ IDN-WG mailing list IDN-WG@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/idn-wg

IDN WG Wiki: https://st.icann.org/idn-policy/index.cgi?at_large_idn_policy

Hi, this is the paragraph I promise to draft to supplement our Statement. Any revision or comment is heartily welcome. Hong _______________________ We note that confusing similarity of IDN ccTLD strings is assessed according to the appearance of the selected string sufficiently close to one or more other strings so that it is probable that a reasonable Internet user "who is unfamiliar with the script would perceive the strings to be the same or confuse one for the other", although "linguistic, technical, and visual perception factors" will be taken into consideration. Notwithstanding the merit and rational of such assessment criterion, we concern that the assessment primarily based on appearance confusion of the strings deemed by the users unfamiliar with the script may not be consistent with the nature and purpose of IDN ccTLDs that is fundamentally put into use for the benefit of the local IDN users in pertinent ccTLD territories. Without sufficient linguistic factor being taken into account, some unreasonable results may occur. For example, an IDN ccTLD that is assessed as not confusingly similar by the user "who is unfamiliar with the script" may well be deemed confusingly similar by the local IDN users; vice verse. We do hope this issue could be addressed in the policy making process and more consultation with the IDN communities in the ccTLD territories could be done. the assessment of confusing similarity depends on amongst other things in developing the method and criteria.

*ALAC Statement on the Draft IDN ccTLD String Selection Criteria, Requirements and Processes Policy Recommendations*

The At-Large Advisory Committee (ALAC) commends the International Domain Names (IDN) country code Policy Development Process Working Group 1 for the comprehensiveness of its draft policy recommendations on the IDN ccTLD String Selection Criteria, Requirements and Processes for territories listed in the ISO 3166-1 list. We note that the recommendations are based on the previous work of the IDNC Working Group and we are pleased to see that the recommendations reflect the learning drawn from the implementation of the IDNccTLD Fast Track Process over the past few years.

We wish to reiterate the significance and importance of IDNs, including IDN Top Level Domains (TLDs) at both the generic and country code levels. We believe that IDNs are crucial for enhancing diversity and multilingualism on the Internet.

We observe that the draft recommendations do not address the issue of variant TLDs and instead contain a placeholder in Section J, which points out that issues pertaining to the management of such TLDs are still being discussed in the ICANN community and will be added later.

We believe that the draft recommendations should indicate that the issue of variants is urgent and need to be addressed in a timely manner. Concurrently, the draft recommendations should also affirm that the outcomes of the variants discussion pertaining to the Label Generation Ruleset (LGR) for the Root Zone would be binding and applicable to all TLDs (including ccTLDs), given that the overarching principle of the LGR process is the security and stability of the Root Zone, which is shared by all Internet users.

END _______________________________________________ IDN-WG mailing list IDN-WG@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/idn-wg

IDN WG Wiki: https://st.icann.org/idn-policy/index.cgi?at_large_idn_policy

-- Professor Dr. Hong Xue Director of Institute for the Internet Policy & Law (IIPL) Beijing Normal University http://www.iipl.org.cn/ 19 Xin Jie Kou Wai Street Beijing 100875 China