I think Bart's wording changes the intent of the original paragraph. This kind of clause has evolved from versions used in the charter of other working groups. For instance, in the Processes WG we had:

Omission in or unreasonable impact of Charter

In the event this charter does not provide guidance and/or the impact of the charter is unreasonable for conducting the business of the WG the chair of the WG will decide.


This was very clear: if something was not anticipated when writing the charter, or is unreasonable, the chair decides. It seems that for this WG there was an attempt to rewrite the clause in a more elegant way, but Bart's wording only gives the chair the power to judge whether the charter covers the given situation, or whether the outcome is unreasonable, but does NOT give the chair the power to make a decision as to what should be done when that happens.

Patricio

Bart Boswinkel wrote: 
Gabi, Paulos,

I think it should read:
The chair of the working group shall exercise reasonable discretion
as to whether the charter does provide guidance and/or
the impact of the charter is workable with respect to conduct the business of the
working group
Kind regards,
BArt
________________________________________
From: owner-ccnso-council@icann.org [owner-ccnso-council@icann.org] On Behalf Of Gabriella Schittek [gabriella.schittek@icann.org]
Sent: Wednesday, July 29, 2009 3:22 AM
To: paulos@sdnp.org.mw; ccnso-council@icann.org
Subject: Re: [ccnso-council] DRDWG-9? - Re: July Update from ICANN's Policy Department Posted

Paulos,

I checked with the last version of the Charter which was sent to me (on the 5th June) and the text in article 9 is identical to the one posted online.

Reading the text, I think that an “s” might be missing behind the word “question”. If you read it like “questions” the text might make more sense?

Gabi


On 7/29/09 12:04 PM, "Dr Paulos Nyirenda" <paulos@sdnp.org.mw> wrote:




Gabi,

It appears that the charter for the ccNSO Delegation & Redelegation
Working Group has errors on article 9 which as posted at
http://www.ccnso.icann.org/workinggroups/drdwg.htm reads as follows:

"9. Omission in or unreasonable impact of Charter
The chair of the working group shall exercise reasonable discretion
with respect to
question as to which this charter does not provide guidance and/or
the impact of the
charter is unworkable with respect to the conduct of business of the
working group."



This does not seem to make a lot of sense. Could you please check
with the original text to see if some text was missed in making this
post to the ccNSO website?

Regards,

Paulos
======================
Dr Paulos B Nyirenda
.mw ccTLD
http://www.registrar.mw


On 29 Jul 2009 at 0:06, Gabriella Schittek wrote:

  
Dear all,

The latest update from ICANN’s Policy Department is now available at
http://www.icann.org/en/topics/policy/update-jul09-en.htm#1

The update is also available in all six official UN languages (English,
Spanish, French, Arabic, Simplified Chinese, Russian).


Issues 2 -6 are ccTLD related:

2) ccNSO Working Group Eyes DNS Emergency Response Planning - a new ccNSO
ad-hoc working group on Emergency Response Planning has been formed.

3) Sydney Session Focuses on Strategic Planning Issues - an overview of the
Strategic Planning Workshop held during the ccNSO meeting in Sydney.

4) ccNSO, GNSO Council Seek Consensus Approach on gTLD Issues - issues with
the timing of the launch of the new gTLD process and the IDN ccTLD Fast
Track leads to the formation of a gNSO/ccNSO Working Group, with the goal to
get them resolved in a joint effort.

5) Members Named to Delegation and Redelegation Working Group - the members
of the Delegation and Redelegation Working Group were confirmed during the
ccNSO Council meeting in Sydney.

6) ccNSO Meetings Evaluation Conducted - an evaluation of the ccNSO meeting
in Sydney was conducted, the results are available online.

7) Operators Asked to Participate in DNSSEC Survey - a new version of the
DNSSEC survey (first conducted in 2007) has been launched. All ccTLD
Operators are invited to participate.

Another topic of interest may be:

11) Board Approves Geographic Regions Review Charter - the ICANN Board has
approved the Charter of the Geographic Regions Review Working Group. The
Working Group is determining whether the uses of ICANN’s Geographic Regions
(as currently defined) continue to meet the requirements of the relevant
stakeholders and will submit proposals for community and Board consideration
relating to the current and future uses and definition of the ICANN
Geographic Regions.

Kind regards,

Gabi