fter some discussion at the Registries Constituency today, would like to make the following suggested edits to #9. The current wording: 9. There should be only one IDN ccTLD string per ISO 3166-1 entry per relevant script. Measures must be taken to limit confusion and collisions due to variants. Suggested edit: 9. There should be only one IDN ccTLD string per ISO 3166-1 entry per relevant script, except in those cases where one script is used for multiple languages and governmental policy makes selecting a single string inappropriate. Measures must be taken to limit confusion and collisions due to variants. The rationale for the edit is to provide for the situation is for example in India where one script is used for multiple languages and the representation of "india" in those different languages using the same script may be different. We would have to make a change to the main body as well, mainly with regards to the response to: a) Should there similarly be only a single IDN ccTLD for a given script for each ¡¥territory¡Š or can there be multiple IDN ccTLD strings? For example, should there be only one equivalent of .cn in Chinese script for China or .ru in Cyrillic for Russia? Proposed GNSO response: Yes, the GNSO believes that there should be only one string per ISO 3166-1 entry per relevant script. Suggested change to the proposed response: Yes, the GNSO believes that there should be only one string per ISO 3166-1 entry per relevant script., except in those cases where one script is used for multiple languages and governmental policy makes selecting a single string inappropriate. Measures must be taken to limit confusion and collisions due to variants. Edmon