19 March, 2016 Hiro Hotta, JGP Two letters from CJK GPs to ICANN and IP 1. Confirmation of the purpose/content of the letters I described below about the intention and brief content of the letters we are supposed to formally send to IP and ICANN. If the below is confirmed in CJK coordination meeting, draft of the letters will be crafted and reviewed by all CJK GP members. 2. result of Marrakech Meeting CJK met on Sunday 6 and Thursday 10 March 2016 and concluded that CJK will send the two (2) formal letters, (letter-a) to IP requesting for the rationale of IP's request to reduce allocatable variants (letter-b) to ICANN requesting for the enhancement of TLD application process to enable more than one applied-for labels to be allocated, even if LGR blocks one of them when another of them is input to LGR 3. proposed letters 3.1 letter-a to IP This is a simple letter asking for their rationale in writing. Such rationale may be essential for all the GPs to determine the allocatability in some of the LGR. So far, IP seems - to accept the following three Chinese labels that are variants of each other * applied for * all traditional * all all simplified - to reject the Japanese labels that are variants of each other even if every variant label is EQUALY VALID as a Japanese word We need to know the clear criteria for acceptance and rejection. 3.2 letter-b to ICANN This is a letter requesting ICANN to incorporate our request to be included in the future TLD application procedure. ICANN says that once a label is decided to be blocked by the LGR, such a label cannot be definitely allocated at the moment of the application and also in the future. However there are cases where (x) blocked label-A and its variant label-B are equally needed to be allocated at the time of application in the case even if LGR does not implement the demand of the language community (y) blocked label-B will be needed to be allocated even if the applicant did not know that label-B is one of the blocked variant of label-A or label-B will be needed to become allocatable in the future (x) can be implemented if the application procedure can review more than one label as input at the same time and give both of them a green light. (y) can be implemented if the application procedure can notify the applicant about the blocked labels and allow the applicant to ask for giving 'allocatable' to some of blocked variant labels. /END Hiro