Dear Christopher,

thank you for picking this up. Watching the ICANN84 public forum, I noted the intervention of both:

- Sergio Salina Porto
- Bill Jouris

Quoting from the instantaneous transcript:

----- start of quote ---------------

SPEAKER:  Okay. Thank you. [Laughs] I am going to speak Spanish, please use headphones. I would like to express my concern for the lack of a point in ICANN guidebook for Latin diacritics PDP. This PDP addresses the possibility of end-users to see their languages properly represented in the Domain Name System including the use of diacritics in the Latin. This is not just a technical issue, it affects the way in which communities write the name and identify themselves online. I am not requesting any extension for the Next Round nor changes in the timeline that was already published. The request that I'm making here is particularly that the applicant guidebook includes a clear because that if the Latin diacritics PDP presents recommendations within the time that is already set, the recommendations will be included in the round. I consider this a reasonable adaptation of the community work that has a impact on the cultural and linguistic sphere and aspects and nature of users. I did not introduce myself, my name is -- and I'm the outgoing secretary of --. I am making the statement in my personal capacity and not on behalf of my region, thank you.         
MAARTEN BOTTERMAN: Thank you, Sergio. Who can answer this?  
ALAN BARRETT:  Thank you, Sergio, for your suggestion. I share your belief that Latin diacritics are very important and there are many well deserving cases where they would be necessary and also where the key without diacritics should maybe live together with the version with the diacritics. In a similar way to help IDN variance are handled. Unfortunately with the timing of this work I think it is probably too late for it to be included but ICANN Org staff will try to see if something is possible. We can't commit to anything but we can try.  

--- end of quote -------

and later:

---- start of quote ------------

CHRISTIAN KAUFMANN:  Thank you, Tripti. We go back to the left microphone.  
SPEAKER:  My name is Bill. Why I am a member of the Latin diacritics PDP Working Group, speaking in a individual capacity. This is a continuation of the remarks Sergio made earlier. When the Latin diacritics Working Group was established a year ago, the GNSO gave us a extremely aggressive timeline getting the work done, which we are happily ahead of. But they would not have done that it seems to me if they were fine with the idea that well, we will get around to actually implementing this at some hypothetical future round sometime years down the road. I think they did that because they thought something needed to be done now. In the beginning of the year the Working Group put in a request that the applicant guidebook include a placeholder for our work to be added in and we were assured that it will happen. In the event, it didn't. So sometime soon, maybe even this afternoon, the Board will be asked to sign off on the applicant guidebook. It may be that it will do that, it's maybe that you will decline and send it back for them to get it right. I will just be clear if you say yes, we are proving it, you are sending a message. There are doubtless reasons beyond those that were offered earlier, ICANN internal reasons why things ought to charge forward. Be very clear that outside the ICANN bubble nobody cares about ICANN internal reasons. All they will hear is a message, ICANN does not care about your language and does not care about you. Now you may be comfortable with that or you may feel like this is not the message we are sending, but be clear that is the message that will be received, ICANN does not care.  
CHRISTIAN KAUFMANN:  Thank you for your comment. Alan?  
ALAN BARRETT:  I will try to take this. Thank you very much for your comments. I very much agree that it is important but on the other hand we do have to follow our process. We have not received policy or guidance from the GNSO Council on what to do and maybe the GNSO Council would like to make a request to the Board to put in some kind of placeholder. Personally I would very much welcome that but it has not happened and for now I think our hands are tied.  
SPEAKER:  You have authority, your hands are not tied by anyone but yourselves. Thank you.  
CHRISTIAN KAUFMANN:  Thank you and with that.  

---------- end of quote --------------


To me, it reads like ICANN is once again on an autopilot to rubber stamp the Final AG whilst under commercial pressures to do so, and in the process, is ready to commit mistakes that it will regret later. Earlier in the week we had a session hosted by At-Large speaking about the wider implications of ICANN's decisions on a geopolitical level and collectively, Board members appear to be oblivious to such important geopolitical consequences, potentially because they are not being counselled adequately about these issues. This is potentially an ICANN failure caused by the general group think that we so often see in the ICANN commercial space.

The Board AGM meeting later this afternoon is indeed a public rubber stamping of resolutions that have already been agreed in advance by the Board in its pre-AGM meeting.

What could be done?

1. Ask our GNSO Liaison Justine Chew on what she suggest could be done NOW
2. Propose that the ALAC issue a very short Statement to be sent to the Board prior to the AGM that the Board should agree to an amendment to their resolution in recognising the Latin Diacritics issue and naming a placeholder in the final Applicant Guidebook for this.

There have been many instances in ICANN's history when, at the very last minute, some resolution text has been added at the last minute - a "friendly amendment" - to keep the door open to include the results of the Latin Diacritics at a placeholder in the final AG.

3. Failing this - because unfortunately the system sometimes sets us up for failure, the ALAC should work with the Canadian Government GAC + other GAC whose languages are affected by this lack of inclusion of the results of the Latin Diacritics Issue. This is a heavier process and one that does not shine a good light onto ICANN's ability to perform its task - rather the opposite, which is that now the GAC has a major issue with ICANN - just like it had in the final months leading to the last round.

I will address this issue in my CPWG report this afternoon. (taking my co-chair's hat off, though)

This is a time to act fast. Otherwise, why are we meeting face to face for?

Kindest regards,

Olivier
(own views)


On 30/10/2025 12:52, lists@christopherwilkinson.eu wrote:

Allow me to react to what we have just heard in the ICANN Public Forum (ICANN84 Dublin.)


A participant speaking on behalf of the working group on Latin Diacritics stated that the Applicant Guide Book for the next gTLD Round would not include Latin Diacritics. The response from the Board was that, absent a recommendation from GNSO, “our hands are tied”!


I recall that the IDN issue has been on ICANN’s table, to my certain knowledge since ICANN03 1999 Santiago. (I was there). It should have been settled by now.

Furthermore, casual inspection of the World’s literature, media and press would confirm that latin diacritics are integral to languages widely used in the Americas, Africa, Europe and elsewhere. One does not have to be a universal linguist to appreciate the social, economic and cultural scale of this issue. Their use in the DNS should have been a no-brainer a long time ago.


Since ICANN84 has not yet concluded, may I request that this situation be reviewed during the ALAC wrap up this afternoon and addressed again to the IANN Board during the concluding session.


Thank you for your attention


Christopher Wilkinson (on-line)


On 24 Oct 2025, at 19:11, cw--- via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> wrote:

Good evening:

Please find attached my comments. I apologise for the rather traditional format.

Regards

Christopher

____________________


1. There are several references to GNSO PDPs producing ‘hard-won consensus recommendations by virtue of a bottom-up multi-stakeholder process’, or words to that effect. This does not ring true.



____________________________





On 17 Oct 2025, at 09:39, Justine Chew via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> wrote:

Dear all,

Thank you again to those who have started providing some input. We welcome and would appreciate more, by way of comments in this Googledoc by Wednesday 22 October 2025, 23:59 UTC as we are hoping to discuss relevant inputs during the CPWG Session at ICANN84.

Please read my email below for details.

Kind regards,
Justine

On Sat, 11 Oct 2025 at 12:17, Justine Chew <justine.chew.icann@gmail.com> wrote:

What is this about?

_______________________________________________
CPWG mailing list -- cpwg@icann.org
To unsubscribe send an email to cpwg-leave@icann.org

_______________________________________________
By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.