For your review - updated version of draft Initial Report
Dear All, Following today’s new gTLD Auction Proceeds CCWG meeting, please find attached an updated version of the draft Initial Report in which updates have been made (in redline) to reflect the deliberations and agreement on how to move forward on the outstanding items that were identified. In addition, staff has added language for the executive summary, based on the current contents of the report. To facilitate your review, previous redlines were accepted (for those wanting to review the previous version, please see https://community.icann.org/x/twiNBQ). Please share with the mailing list by Monday 1 October at the latest whether there are any further issues or edits that need to be discussed. Based on the feedback received, the leadership team will decide whether or not to go ahead with the meeting on 4 October. As a reminder, the objective is to publish the Initial Report for public comment by 8 October at the latest. Best regards, Emily, Joke and Marika Marika Konings Vice President, Policy Development Support – GNSO, Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Email: marika.konings@icann.org<mailto:marika.konings@icann.org> Follow the GNSO via Twitter @ICANN_GNSO Find out more about the GNSO by taking our interactive courses<http://learn.icann.org/courses/gnso> and visiting the GNSO Newcomer pages<http://gnso.icann.org/sites/gnso.icann.org/files/gnso/presentations/policy-e...>.
Thanks Marika (and the other editors) Some more comments, more on the form. * Given we've changed Preamble section into Guidance.. (good), we need to update all the references to this section that are still using the word preamble, e.g. "The CCWG recommends that the preamble (see Annex D) ". There are a few of those. * It would greatly help readers whenever we mention the Question numbers, if we provided some kind of summary of the question purpose as bubble help, or at least a link to the question text found below in the document. e.g. "Implementation guidance in relation to charter _question #1_" would have the text "Q1: what framework for the disbursement of Auction funds ?" appearing when moving the mouse over it, and/or a link to the full question text in the Background section. * In general, whenever we use a reference, ala "See Section X", I find it kind of offending to the reader that the document doesn't give a link to the said section (I used to promote using HTML vs Word in open working groups, I'm passed that crisis ;) but at least we should use hyperlinks when it makes sense, now that Word supports them) * There are a lot of occurrences of the word "implementation" in the report, and this is confusing because they don't always mean the same thing or use the same full name, e.g. Implementation phase, Implementation Process, Implementation guidance, etc. I think we need to have a section called "Implementation Phase", which introduces what it is (as described already in 1.4, maybe with more details), and we need to point at it whenever we refer to it (with a link). And stick to that name. e.g instead of Implementation guidance in relation to charter question #2: The CCWG recommends that the preamble (see Annex D) and list of example projects (see Annex E) are considered during the implementation process. we should use Guidance for the _Implementation Phase_ in relation to charter _Question #2_: The CCWG recommends that the section on "Guidance for proposal review and Selection" (see _Annex D_) and list of example projects (see _Annex E_) are considered during the _Implementation Phase_. This way, it will also be much easier to list all the things that we expect the Implementation Phase to do. * The second diagram in Annex C is really too small to read, and since it's an image, can't really be zoomed in easily. We should provide real text, not pixels, and probably cut the figure in 2 pieces. For those 2 pictures, we should give a description in plain text (for accessibility reasons at least). On 2018-09-21 01:16, Marika Konings wrote:
Dear All,
Following today’s new gTLD Auction Proceeds CCWG meeting, please find attached an updated version of the draft Initial Report in which updates have been made (in redline) to reflect the deliberations and agreement on how to move forward on the outstanding items that were identified. In addition, staff has added language for the executive summary, based on the current contents of the report. To facilitate your review, previous redlines were accepted (for those wanting to review the previous version, please see https://community.icann.org/x/twiNBQ). Please share with the mailing list by Monday 1 October at the latest whether there are any further issues or edits that need to be discussed. Based on the feedback received, the leadership team will decide whether or not to go ahead with the meeting on 4 October. As a reminder, the objective is to publish the Initial Report for public comment by 8 October at the latest.
Best regards,
Emily, Joke and Marika
Marika Konings Vice President, Policy Development Support – GNSO, Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Email: marika.konings@icann.org<mailto:marika.konings@icann.org>
Follow the GNSO via Twitter @ICANN_GNSO Find out more about the GNSO by taking our interactive courses<http://learn.icann.org/courses/gnso> and visiting the GNSO Newcomer pages<http://gnso.icann.org/sites/gnso.icann.org/files/gnso/presentations/policy-e...>.
_______________________________________________ Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds
Dear Marika Dear Erika I am reading the initial draft over week-end . Unless I have not been attentive, I do not see « Preliminary Recommendation 2 » May you pls advise on the question Sent from my iPhone
On 22 Sep 2018, at 13:33, Daniel Dardailler <danield@w3.org> wrote:
Thanks Marika (and the other editors)
Some more comments, more on the form.
* Given we've changed Preamble section into Guidance.. (good), we need to update all the references to this section that are still using the word preamble, e.g. "The CCWG recommends that the preamble (see Annex D) ". There are a few of those.
* It would greatly help readers whenever we mention the Question numbers, if we provided some kind of summary of the question purpose as bubble help, or at least a link to the question text found below in the document.
e.g. "Implementation guidance in relation to charter _question #1_"
would have the text "Q1: what framework for the disbursement of Auction funds ?"
appearing when moving the mouse over it, and/or a link to the full question text in the Background section.
* In general, whenever we use a reference, ala "See Section X", I find it kind of offending to the reader that the document doesn't give a link to the said section (I used to promote using HTML vs Word in open working groups, I'm passed that crisis ;) but at least we should use hyperlinks when it makes sense, now that Word supports them)
* There are a lot of occurrences of the word "implementation" in the report, and this is confusing because they don't always mean the same thing or use the same full name, e.g. Implementation phase, Implementation Process, Implementation guidance, etc.
I think we need to have a section called "Implementation Phase", which introduces what it is (as described already in 1.4, maybe with more details), and we need to point at it whenever we refer to it (with a link). And stick to that name.
e.g instead of Implementation guidance in relation to charter question #2: The CCWG recommends that the preamble (see Annex D) and list of example projects (see Annex E) are considered during the implementation process.
we should use Guidance for the _Implementation Phase_ in relation to charter _Question #2_: The CCWG recommends that the section on "Guidance for proposal review and Selection" (see _Annex D_) and list of example projects (see _Annex E_) are considered during the _Implementation Phase_.
This way, it will also be much easier to list all the things that we expect the Implementation Phase to do.
* The second diagram in Annex C is really too small to read, and since it's an image, can't really be zoomed in easily. We should provide real text, not pixels, and probably cut the figure in 2 pieces. For those 2 pictures, we should give a description in plain text (for accessibility reasons at least).
On 2018-09-21 01:16, Marika Konings wrote: Dear All, Following today’s new gTLD Auction Proceeds CCWG meeting, please find attached an updated version of the draft Initial Report in which updates have been made (in redline) to reflect the deliberations and agreement on how to move forward on the outstanding items that were identified. In addition, staff has added language for the executive summary, based on the current contents of the report. To facilitate your review, previous redlines were accepted (for those wanting to review the previous version, please see https://community.icann.org/x/twiNBQ). Please share with the mailing list by Monday 1 October at the latest whether there are any further issues or edits that need to be discussed. Based on the feedback received, the leadership team will decide whether or not to go ahead with the meeting on 4 October. As a reminder, the objective is to publish the Initial Report for public comment by 8 October at the latest. Best regards, Emily, Joke and Marika Marika Konings Vice President, Policy Development Support – GNSO, Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Email: marika.konings@icann.org<mailto:marika.konings@icann.org> Follow the GNSO via Twitter @ICANN_GNSO Find out more about the GNSO by taking our interactive courses<http://learn.icann.org/courses/gnso> and visiting the GNSO Newcomer pages<http://gnso.icann.org/sites/gnso.icann.org/files/gnso/presentations/policy-e...>. _______________________________________________ Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds
Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds
Dear Marika, Dear Erika Tks again fir your hard works assisting and serving two important groups CCWG Auction and EPDP Temp. Spec .on GPDR I am half way through the initial draft . Apart from Rec. 2 Thai I have not found here , there are very minor grammatical edits to be done Regards Kavouss Sent from my iPhone
On 22 Sep 2018, at 13:33, Daniel Dardailler <danield@w3.org> wrote:
Thanks Marika (and the other editors)
Some more comments, more on the form.
* Given we've changed Preamble section into Guidance.. (good), we need to update all the references to this section that are still using the word preamble, e.g. "The CCWG recommends that the preamble (see Annex D) ". There are a few of those.
* It would greatly help readers whenever we mention the Question numbers, if we provided some kind of summary of the question purpose as bubble help, or at least a link to the question text found below in the document.
e.g. "Implementation guidance in relation to charter _question #1_"
would have the text "Q1: what framework for the disbursement of Auction funds ?"
appearing when moving the mouse over it, and/or a link to the full question text in the Background section.
* In general, whenever we use a reference, ala "See Section X", I find it kind of offending to the reader that the document doesn't give a link to the said section (I used to promote using HTML vs Word in open working groups, I'm passed that crisis ;) but at least we should use hyperlinks when it makes sense, now that Word supports them)
* There are a lot of occurrences of the word "implementation" in the report, and this is confusing because they don't always mean the same thing or use the same full name, e.g. Implementation phase, Implementation Process, Implementation guidance, etc.
I think we need to have a section called "Implementation Phase", which introduces what it is (as described already in 1.4, maybe with more details), and we need to point at it whenever we refer to it (with a link). And stick to that name.
e.g instead of Implementation guidance in relation to charter question #2: The CCWG recommends that the preamble (see Annex D) and list of example projects (see Annex E) are considered during the implementation process.
we should use Guidance for the _Implementation Phase_ in relation to charter _Question #2_: The CCWG recommends that the section on "Guidance for proposal review and Selection" (see _Annex D_) and list of example projects (see _Annex E_) are considered during the _Implementation Phase_.
This way, it will also be much easier to list all the things that we expect the Implementation Phase to do.
* The second diagram in Annex C is really too small to read, and since it's an image, can't really be zoomed in easily. We should provide real text, not pixels, and probably cut the figure in 2 pieces. For those 2 pictures, we should give a description in plain text (for accessibility reasons at least).
On 2018-09-21 01:16, Marika Konings wrote: Dear All, Following today’s new gTLD Auction Proceeds CCWG meeting, please find attached an updated version of the draft Initial Report in which updates have been made (in redline) to reflect the deliberations and agreement on how to move forward on the outstanding items that were identified. In addition, staff has added language for the executive summary, based on the current contents of the report. To facilitate your review, previous redlines were accepted (for those wanting to review the previous version, please see https://community.icann.org/x/twiNBQ). Please share with the mailing list by Monday 1 October at the latest whether there are any further issues or edits that need to be discussed. Based on the feedback received, the leadership team will decide whether or not to go ahead with the meeting on 4 October. As a reminder, the objective is to publish the Initial Report for public comment by 8 October at the latest. Best regards, Emily, Joke and Marika Marika Konings Vice President, Policy Development Support – GNSO, Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Email: marika.konings@icann.org<mailto:marika.konings@icann.org> Follow the GNSO via Twitter @ICANN_GNSO Find out more about the GNSO by taking our interactive courses<http://learn.icann.org/courses/gnso> and visiting the GNSO Newcomer pages<http://gnso.icann.org/sites/gnso.icann.org/files/gnso/presentations/policy-e...>. _______________________________________________ Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds
Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds
Dear Kavouss - Thank you for sending us your first impression. Wishing you a good week! Erika Sent from my iPhone
On Sep 22, 2018, at 9:39 AM, Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Marika, Dear Erika Tks again fir your hard works assisting and serving two important groups CCWG Auction and EPDP Temp. Spec .on GPDR I am half way through the initial draft . Apart from Rec. 2 Thai I have not found here , there are very minor grammatical edits to be done Regards Kavouss
Sent from my iPhone
On 22 Sep 2018, at 13:33, Daniel Dardailler <danield@w3.org> wrote:
Thanks Marika (and the other editors)
Some more comments, more on the form.
* Given we've changed Preamble section into Guidance.. (good), we need to update all the references to this section that are still using the word preamble, e.g. "The CCWG recommends that the preamble (see Annex D) ". There are a few of those.
* It would greatly help readers whenever we mention the Question numbers, if we provided some kind of summary of the question purpose as bubble help, or at least a link to the question text found below in the document.
e.g. "Implementation guidance in relation to charter _question #1_"
would have the text "Q1: what framework for the disbursement of Auction funds ?"
appearing when moving the mouse over it, and/or a link to the full question text in the Background section.
* In general, whenever we use a reference, ala "See Section X", I find it kind of offending to the reader that the document doesn't give a link to the said section (I used to promote using HTML vs Word in open working groups, I'm passed that crisis ;) but at least we should use hyperlinks when it makes sense, now that Word supports them)
* There are a lot of occurrences of the word "implementation" in the report, and this is confusing because they don't always mean the same thing or use the same full name, e.g. Implementation phase, Implementation Process, Implementation guidance, etc.
I think we need to have a section called "Implementation Phase", which introduces what it is (as described already in 1.4, maybe with more details), and we need to point at it whenever we refer to it (with a link). And stick to that name.
e.g instead of Implementation guidance in relation to charter question #2: The CCWG recommends that the preamble (see Annex D) and list of example projects (see Annex E) are considered during the implementation process.
we should use Guidance for the _Implementation Phase_ in relation to charter _Question #2_: The CCWG recommends that the section on "Guidance for proposal review and Selection" (see _Annex D_) and list of example projects (see _Annex E_) are considered during the _Implementation Phase_.
This way, it will also be much easier to list all the things that we expect the Implementation Phase to do.
* The second diagram in Annex C is really too small to read, and since it's an image, can't really be zoomed in easily. We should provide real text, not pixels, and probably cut the figure in 2 pieces. For those 2 pictures, we should give a description in plain text (for accessibility reasons at least).
On 2018-09-21 01:16, Marika Konings wrote: Dear All, Following today’s new gTLD Auction Proceeds CCWG meeting, please find attached an updated version of the draft Initial Report in which updates have been made (in redline) to reflect the deliberations and agreement on how to move forward on the outstanding items that were identified. In addition, staff has added language for the executive summary, based on the current contents of the report. To facilitate your review, previous redlines were accepted (for those wanting to review the previous version, please see https://community.icann.org/x/twiNBQ). Please share with the mailing list by Monday 1 October at the latest whether there are any further issues or edits that need to be discussed. Based on the feedback received, the leadership team will decide whether or not to go ahead with the meeting on 4 October. As a reminder, the objective is to publish the Initial Report for public comment by 8 October at the latest. Best regards, Emily, Joke and Marika Marika Konings Vice President, Policy Development Support – GNSO, Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Email: marika.konings@icann.org<mailto:marika.konings@icann.org> Follow the GNSO via Twitter @ICANN_GNSO Find out more about the GNSO by taking our interactive courses<http://learn.icann.org/courses/gnso> and visiting the GNSO Newcomer pages<http://gnso.icann.org/sites/gnso.icann.org/files/gnso/presentations/policy-e...>. _______________________________________________ Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds
Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds
Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds
I agree with the approach Daniel shared with us. Mostly of my points lies on the same aspect: on how readable is the text and specially for foreign readers; how understandable the text becomes if it is not so friendly, regarding references. ( the going back and forward looking for the questions generates distraction that for foreign people makes more difficult to understand.) References easily accessible when you are reading certainly makes it comprehensible and the reading productive. As the text itself , from my view , represents correctly what we have agreed during our work. For that we need thank Marika and staff team. Best regards Vanda Scartezini Polo Consultores Associados Av. Paulista 1159, cj 1004 01311-200- Sao Paulo, SP, Brazil Land Line: +55 11 3266.6253 Mobile: + 55 11 98181.1464 Sorry for any typos. On 9/23/18, 15:31, "Ccwg-auctionproceeds on behalf of Erika Mann" <ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces@icann.org on behalf of erika@erikamann.com> wrote: Dear Kavouss - Thank you for sending us your first impression. Wishing you a good week! Erika Sent from my iPhone > On Sep 22, 2018, at 9:39 AM, Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com> wrote: > > Dear Marika, > Dear Erika > Tks again fir your hard works assisting and serving two important groups CCWG Auction and EPDP Temp. Spec .on GPDR > I am half way through the initial draft . Apart from Rec. 2 Thai I have not found here , there are very minor grammatical edits to be done > Regards > Kavouss > > Sent from my iPhone > >> On 22 Sep 2018, at 13:33, Daniel Dardailler <danield@w3.org> wrote: >> >> Thanks Marika (and the other editors) >> >> Some more comments, more on the form. >> >> * Given we've changed Preamble section into Guidance.. (good), we need to update all the references to this section that are still using the word preamble, e.g. "The CCWG recommends that the preamble (see Annex D) ". There are a few of those. >> >> >> * It would greatly help readers whenever we mention the Question numbers, if we provided some kind of summary of the question purpose as bubble help, or at least a link to the question text found below in the document. >> >> e.g. >> "Implementation guidance in relation to charter _question #1_" >> >> would have the text >> "Q1: what framework for the disbursement of Auction funds ?" >> >> appearing when moving the mouse over it, and/or a link to the full question text in the Background section. >> >> * In general, whenever we use a reference, ala "See Section X", I find it kind of offending to the reader that the document doesn't give a link to the said section (I used to promote using HTML vs Word in open working groups, I'm passed that crisis ;) but at least we should use hyperlinks when it makes sense, now that Word supports them) >> >> * There are a lot of occurrences of the word "implementation" in the report, and this is confusing because they don't always mean the same thing or use the same full name, e.g. Implementation phase, Implementation Process, Implementation guidance, etc. >> >> I think we need to have a section called "Implementation Phase", which introduces what it is (as described already in 1.4, maybe with more details), and we need to point at it whenever we refer to it (with a link). And stick to that name. >> >> e.g instead of >> Implementation guidance in relation to charter question #2: The CCWG recommends that the preamble (see Annex D) and list of example projects (see Annex E) are considered during the implementation process. >> >> we should use >> Guidance for the _Implementation Phase_ in relation to charter _Question #2_: The CCWG recommends that the section on "Guidance for proposal review and Selection" (see _Annex D_) and list of example projects (see _Annex E_) are considered during the _Implementation Phase_. >> >> This way, it will also be much easier to list all the things that we expect the Implementation Phase to do. >> >> * The second diagram in Annex C is really too small to read, and since it's an image, can't really be zoomed in easily. We should provide real text, not pixels, and probably cut the figure in 2 pieces. For those 2 pictures, we should give a description in plain text (for accessibility reasons at least). >> >> >> >>> On 2018-09-21 01:16, Marika Konings wrote: >>> Dear All, >>> Following today’s new gTLD Auction Proceeds CCWG meeting, please find >>> attached an updated version of the draft Initial Report in which >>> updates have been made (in redline) to reflect the deliberations and >>> agreement on how to move forward on the outstanding items that were >>> identified. In addition, staff has added language for the executive >>> summary, based on the current contents of the report. To facilitate >>> your review, previous redlines were accepted (for those wanting to >>> review the previous version, please see >>> https://community.icann.org/x/twiNBQ). Please share with the mailing >>> list by Monday 1 October at the latest whether there are any further >>> issues or edits that need to be discussed. Based on the feedback >>> received, the leadership team will decide whether or not to go ahead >>> with the meeting on 4 October. As a reminder, the objective is to >>> publish the Initial Report for public comment by 8 October at the >>> latest. >>> Best regards, >>> Emily, Joke and Marika >>> Marika Konings >>> Vice President, Policy Development Support – GNSO, Internet >>> Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) >>> Email: marika.konings@icann.org<mailto:marika.konings@icann.org> >>> Follow the GNSO via Twitter @ICANN_GNSO >>> Find out more about the GNSO by taking our interactive >>> courses<http://learn.icann.org/courses/gnso> and visiting the GNSO >>> Newcomer >>> pages<http://gnso.icann.org/sites/gnso.icann.org/files/gnso/presentations/policy-e...>. >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list >>> Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org >>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds >> _______________________________________________ >> Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list >> Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org >> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds > _______________________________________________ > Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list > Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds _______________________________________________ Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds
Dear Kavouss, Thank you for this comment regarding Preliminary Recommendation #2. It appears that this recommendation was accidentally left out of the executive summary. This will be corrected in the next revision. You can find the preliminary recommendation on page 21 of the recent draft: Preliminary CCWG Recommendation #2: The CCWG agreed that specific objectives of new gTLD Auction Proceeds fund allocation are: ● Benefit the development, distribution, evolution and structures/projects that support the Internet's unique identifier systems; ● Benefit capacity building and underserved populations, and; ● Benefit the open and interoperable Internet New gTLD Auction Proceeds are expected to be allocated in a manner consistent with ICANN’s mission. Kind regards, Emily New gTLD Auction Proceeds are expected to be allocated in a manner consistent with ICANN’s mission. On 22/09/2018, 18:39, "Ccwg-auctionproceeds on behalf of Arasteh" <ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces@icann.org on behalf of kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com> wrote: Dear Marika, Dear Erika Tks again fir your hard works assisting and serving two important groups CCWG Auction and EPDP Temp. Spec .on GPDR I am half way through the initial draft . Apart from Rec. 2 Thai I have not found here , there are very minor grammatical edits to be done Regards Kavouss Sent from my iPhone > On 22 Sep 2018, at 13:33, Daniel Dardailler <danield@w3.org> wrote: > > Thanks Marika (and the other editors) > > Some more comments, more on the form. > > * Given we've changed Preamble section into Guidance.. (good), we need to update all the references to this section that are still using the word preamble, e.g. "The CCWG recommends that the preamble (see Annex D) ". There are a few of those. > > > * It would greatly help readers whenever we mention the Question numbers, if we provided some kind of summary of the question purpose as bubble help, or at least a link to the question text found below in the document. > > e.g. > "Implementation guidance in relation to charter _question #1_" > > would have the text > "Q1: what framework for the disbursement of Auction funds ?" > > appearing when moving the mouse over it, and/or a link to the full question text in the Background section. > > * In general, whenever we use a reference, ala "See Section X", I find it kind of offending to the reader that the document doesn't give a link to the said section (I used to promote using HTML vs Word in open working groups, I'm passed that crisis ;) but at least we should use hyperlinks when it makes sense, now that Word supports them) > > * There are a lot of occurrences of the word "implementation" in the report, and this is confusing because they don't always mean the same thing or use the same full name, e.g. Implementation phase, Implementation Process, Implementation guidance, etc. > > I think we need to have a section called "Implementation Phase", which introduces what it is (as described already in 1.4, maybe with more details), and we need to point at it whenever we refer to it (with a link). And stick to that name. > > e.g instead of > Implementation guidance in relation to charter question #2: The CCWG recommends that the preamble (see Annex D) and list of example projects (see Annex E) are considered during the implementation process. > > we should use > Guidance for the _Implementation Phase_ in relation to charter _Question #2_: The CCWG recommends that the section on "Guidance for proposal review and Selection" (see _Annex D_) and list of example projects (see _Annex E_) are considered during the _Implementation Phase_. > > This way, it will also be much easier to list all the things that we expect the Implementation Phase to do. > > * The second diagram in Annex C is really too small to read, and since it's an image, can't really be zoomed in easily. We should provide real text, not pixels, and probably cut the figure in 2 pieces. For those 2 pictures, we should give a description in plain text (for accessibility reasons at least). > > > >> On 2018-09-21 01:16, Marika Konings wrote: >> Dear All, >> Following today’s new gTLD Auction Proceeds CCWG meeting, please find >> attached an updated version of the draft Initial Report in which >> updates have been made (in redline) to reflect the deliberations and >> agreement on how to move forward on the outstanding items that were >> identified. In addition, staff has added language for the executive >> summary, based on the current contents of the report. To facilitate >> your review, previous redlines were accepted (for those wanting to >> review the previous version, please see >> https://community.icann.org/x/twiNBQ). Please share with the mailing >> list by Monday 1 October at the latest whether there are any further >> issues or edits that need to be discussed. Based on the feedback >> received, the leadership team will decide whether or not to go ahead >> with the meeting on 4 October. As a reminder, the objective is to >> publish the Initial Report for public comment by 8 October at the >> latest. >> Best regards, >> Emily, Joke and Marika >> Marika Konings >> Vice President, Policy Development Support – GNSO, Internet >> Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) >> Email: marika.konings@icann.org<mailto:marika.konings@icann.org> >> Follow the GNSO via Twitter @ICANN_GNSO >> Find out more about the GNSO by taking our interactive >> courses<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__learn.icann.org_courses_...> and visiting the GNSO >> Newcomer >> pages<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__gnso.icann.org_sites_gns...>. >> _______________________________________________ >> Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list >> Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org >> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds > _______________________________________________ > Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list > Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds _______________________________________________ Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds
Hi everyone, I think this updated version reflects well the input provided not only via the conference calls but through the many surveys, documents and email exchanges the group has had since the process started. It provides clear recommendations to move forward. Although there are some issues that I would rather see moving a bit differently, I look forward to review it again when then community input comes through. Thank you to everyone that worked so hard to have this document ready for public comments. I am again traveling, and family commitments might prevent me from joining the 4 Oct call (depending of the time) if the leadership team decides to go ahead with the call. Regards, Sylvia ———— Sylvia Cadena | APNIC Foundation - Head of Programs | sylvia@apnic.net<mailto:sylvia@apnic.net> | http://www.apnic.foundation<http://www.apnic.foundation/> ISIF Asia, WSIS Champion on International Cooperation 2018 | http://www.isif.asia<http://www.isif.asia/> | FB ISIF.asia | @ISIF_Asia | G+ ISIFAsia | 6 Cordelia Street, South Brisbane, QLD, 4101 Australia<x-apple-data-detectors://5> | PO Box 3646 | +10 GMT | skypeID: sylviacadena | Tel: +61 7 3858 3100<tel:+61%207%203858%203100> | Fax: +61 7 3858 3199<tel:3858%203199> * Love trees. Print only if necessary. On 22 Sep 2018, at 9:34 pm, Daniel Dardailler <danield@w3.org<mailto:danield@w3.org>> wrote: Thanks Marika (and the other editors) Some more comments, more on the form. * Given we've changed Preamble section into Guidance.. (good), we need to update all the references to this section that are still using the word preamble, e.g. "The CCWG recommends that the preamble (see Annex D) ". There are a few of those. * It would greatly help readers whenever we mention the Question numbers, if we provided some kind of summary of the question purpose as bubble help, or at least a link to the question text found below in the document. e.g. "Implementation guidance in relation to charter _question #1_" would have the text "Q1: what framework for the disbursement of Auction funds ?" appearing when moving the mouse over it, and/or a link to the full question text in the Background section. * In general, whenever we use a reference, ala "See Section X", I find it kind of offending to the reader that the document doesn't give a link to the said section (I used to promote using HTML vs Word in open working groups, I'm passed that crisis ;) but at least we should use hyperlinks when it makes sense, now that Word supports them) * There are a lot of occurrences of the word "implementation" in the report, and this is confusing because they don't always mean the same thing or use the same full name, e.g. Implementation phase, Implementation Process, Implementation guidance, etc. I think we need to have a section called "Implementation Phase", which introduces what it is (as described already in 1.4, maybe with more details), and we need to point at it whenever we refer to it (with a link). And stick to that name. e.g instead of Implementation guidance in relation to charter question #2: The CCWG recommends that the preamble (see Annex D) and list of example projects (see Annex E) are considered during the implementation process. we should use Guidance for the _Implementation Phase_ in relation to charter _Question #2_: The CCWG recommends that the section on "Guidance for proposal review and Selection" (see _Annex D_) and list of example projects (see _Annex E_) are considered during the _Implementation Phase_. This way, it will also be much easier to list all the things that we expect the Implementation Phase to do. * The second diagram in Annex C is really too small to read, and since it's an image, can't really be zoomed in easily. We should provide real text, not pixels, and probably cut the figure in 2 pieces. For those 2 pictures, we should give a description in plain text (for accessibility reasons at least). On 2018-09-21 01:16, Marika Konings wrote: Dear All, Following today’s new gTLD Auction Proceeds CCWG meeting, please find attached an updated version of the draft Initial Report in which updates have been made (in redline) to reflect the deliberations and agreement on how to move forward on the outstanding items that were identified. In addition, staff has added language for the executive summary, based on the current contents of the report. To facilitate your review, previous redlines were accepted (for those wanting to review the previous version, please see https://community.icann.org/x/twiNBQ). Please share with the mailing list by Monday 1 October at the latest whether there are any further issues or edits that need to be discussed. Based on the feedback received, the leadership team will decide whether or not to go ahead with the meeting on 4 October. As a reminder, the objective is to publish the Initial Report for public comment by 8 October at the latest. Best regards, Emily, Joke and Marika Marika Konings Vice President, Policy Development Support – GNSO, Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Email: marika.konings@icann.org<mailto:marika.konings@icann.org><mailto:marika.konings@icann.org> Follow the GNSO via Twitter @ICANN_GNSO Find out more about the GNSO by taking our interactive courses<http://learn.icann.org/courses/gnso> and visiting the GNSO Newcomer pages<http://gnso.icann.org/sites/gnso.icann.org/files/gnso/presentations/policy-e...>. _______________________________________________ Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org<mailto:Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds _______________________________________________ Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org<mailto:Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds
I hope we can move forward with Oct 4, as we need to publish our Initial Report. ________________________________ From: Ccwg-auctionproceeds <ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2018 7:16 PM To: ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org Subject: [Ccwg-auctionproceeds] For your review - updated version of draft Initial Report Dear All, Following today’s new gTLD Auction Proceeds CCWG meeting, please find attached an updated version of the draft Initial Report in which updates have been made (in redline) to reflect the deliberations and agreement on how to move forward on the outstanding items that were identified. In addition, staff has added language for the executive summary, based on the current contents of the report. To facilitate your review, previous redlines were accepted (for those wanting to review the previous version, please see https://community.icann.org/x/twiNBQ<https://nam03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcommunity.icann.org%2Fx%2FtwiNBQ&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cd3bdb88f5d214904f0a008d61f4f2302%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636730823674505060&sdata=AW2JYlnVlWr%2B8YVSGnKJIbzmFlkU7yao%2BdK9PZBqA3E%3D&reserved=0>). Please share with the mailing list by Monday 1 October at the latest whether there are any further issues or edits that need to be discussed. Based on the feedback received, the leadership team will decide whether or not to go ahead with the meeting on 4 October. As a reminder, the objective is to publish the Initial Report for public comment by 8 October at the latest. Best regards, Emily, Joke and Marika Marika Konings Vice President, Policy Development Support – GNSO, Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Email: marika.konings@icann.org<mailto:marika.konings@icann.org> Follow the GNSO via Twitter @ICANN_GNSO Find out more about the GNSO by taking our interactive courses<https://nam03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Flearn.icann...> and visiting the GNSO Newcomer pages<https://nam03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fgnso.icann....>.
Dear Marylyn, Yes but we need to look that final draft before being published. There are some required edits e.g. line 53on page 3 , it says This report sets out the core issues* the* that…. This “the “should be suppressed Regards Kavouss On Mon, Sep 24, 2018 at 3:28 PM Marilyn Cade <marilynscade@hotmail.com> wrote:
I hope we can move forward with Oct 4, as we need to publish our Initial Report. ------------------------------ *From:* Ccwg-auctionproceeds <ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> *Sent:* Thursday, September 20, 2018 7:16 PM *To:* ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org *Subject:* [Ccwg-auctionproceeds] For your review - updated version of draft Initial Report
Dear All,
Following today’s new gTLD Auction Proceeds CCWG meeting, please find attached an updated version of the draft Initial Report in which updates have been made (in redline) to reflect the deliberations and agreement on how to move forward on the outstanding items that were identified. In addition, staff has added language for the executive summary, based on the current contents of the report. To facilitate your review, previous redlines were accepted (for those wanting to review the previous version, please see https://community.icann.org/x/twiNBQ <https://nam03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcommunity....>). Please share with the mailing list* by Monday 1 October at the latest* whether there are any further issues or edits that need to be discussed. Based on the feedback received, the leadership team will decide whether or not to go ahead with the meeting on 4 October. As a reminder, the objective is to publish the Initial Report for public comment by 8 October at the latest.
Best regards,
Emily, Joke and Marika
*Marika Konings*
*Vice President, Policy Development Support – GNSO, Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) *
*Email: marika.konings@icann.org <marika.konings@icann.org> *
*Follow the GNSO via Twitter @ICANN_GNSO*
*Find out more about the GNSO by taking our interactive courses <https://nam03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Flearn.icann...> and visiting the GNSO Newcomer pages <https://nam03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fgnso.icann....>. *
_______________________________________________ Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds
participants (9)
-
Arasteh -
Daniel Dardailler -
Emily Barabas -
Erika Mann -
Kavouss Arasteh
-
Marika Konings -
Marilyn Cade -
Sylvia Cadena -
Vanda Scartezini