- Gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg - lists.icann.org

MP3 Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information PDP WG meeting - 14 August 2014
by Nathalie Peregrine Aug. 15, 2014

Aug. 15, 2014

Dear All, Please find the MP3 recording for the Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information PDP Working Group call held on Thursday 14 August at 1300 UTC at: http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-transliteration-contact-20140814-en.mp3 On page: http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar#aug The recordings and transcriptions of the calls are posted on the GNSO Master Calendar page: <http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/> http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/ Attendees: Emily Taylor - RrSG Chris Dillon – NCSG Amr Elsadr – NCUC Rudi Vansnick – NPOC Jennifer Chung - RySG Jim Galvin – SSAC Ubolthip Sethakaset – Individual Wolf-Ulrich Knoben – ISPCP Wanawit Ahkuputra – GAC Mae Suchayapim Siriwat – GAC Patrick Lenihan - NCUC Apologies: Petter Rindforth – IPC Iliya Bazlyankov – RrSG ICANN staff: Julie Hedlund Mary Wong Amy Bivins Nathalie Peregrine ** Please let me know if your name has been left off the list ** Wiki page: <http://tinyurl.com/mpwxstx> http://tinyurl.com/mpwxstx Thank you. Kind regards, Nathalie GNSO Secretariat Adobe Chat Transcript for Thursday 14 August 2014: Nathalie Peregrine:Dear all, welcome to the Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information PDP Working group call on the 14th August 2014 Rudi Vansnick:hi everyone Emily Taylor:Hi everyone Chris Dillon:Hello all! Rudi Vansnick:just back from holidays Rudi Vansnick:very limited internet access during 2 weeks is painful ... Amr Elsadr:Hi all. Apologies about the prolonged absence. Hope you're all well. Nathalie Peregrine:Welcome back Rudi and Amr! Jennifer Chung:Hello everyone! Emily Taylor:This is my first call participating in the working group. I come from Registrar SG Chris Dillon:Welcome! Rudi Vansnick:welcome Emily Emily Taylor:Thank you. And thanks for the draft papers, Chris Julie Hedlund:I am in the process of getting on the call. Called in but got dropped. Julie Hedlund:Back on Jennifer Chung:I have updated my SOI - to include my wgs and picture Jennifer Chung:sorry couldn't connect audio just now Rudi Vansnick:thanks Jennifer Julie Hedlund:The document is unsynced. Nathalie Peregrine:Patrick Lenihan has joined the AC room Amr Elsadr:Can the document be shared in the AC Room? Emily Taylor:Sorry - acronym check - what's IRD? Amr Elsadr:Internationalized Registration Data. Emily Taylor::) Thanks Amr Elsadr:;-) Julie Hedlund:Pardon me -- which document is being referenced? I did not catch it. Amr Elsadr:@Jim: Is your concern about this WG recommending that IRD be provided as an option for registrants? Emily Taylor:I can hear you! but I'm not able to be heard. Sorry Emily Taylor:Agree with Jim Galvin Nathalie Peregrine:Emily, we can dial out to you if you provide me with a contact number Emily Taylor:on the costs and unintended consequences of two tracks of data, not knowing which is authoritative, and the legacy issue. Emily Taylor:I see Amr's question - I don't see IRD as being the optional bit, but a translation/transliteration as being optional Emily Taylor:Thanks for clarification Chris. Emily Taylor:I also got some feedback from our technical people, who were also questioning the value of having transliteration, and the difficulties/costs for registrars to have to validate such data Amr Elsadr:@Emily: I believe those concerns are reflected in the proposed recommendations. Emily Taylor:I think they are too :) Emily Taylor:Thanks for that, Chris. Very useful. One other thing (that may already be incorporated in your thinking), is that even to have an option to transliterate/translate will mean creation of new database fields, and potentially lengthening and complicating the process of registration Amr Elsadr:Ah. Thanks Chris. Emily Taylor:Thanks Chris Emily Taylor:LOL Amr Elsadr:Isn't legacy transformed contact information presumably already validated? Amr Elsadr::) Emily Taylor:Ok back to typing Emily Taylor:Everything you say is very sensible, Chris. My concern is that even setting flags to indicate that data is legacy or not will introduce costs for registrars potentially Emily Taylor:Is this something that has already been discussed? Emily Taylor:Thanks. LIke others, I just got back from holiday, and would like to share with other members of the RrSG who manage large databases Emily Taylor:to get their views Amr Elsadr:I (with my limited knowledge) agree with Emily. I'm also not exactly sure what purpose it would serve. Emily Taylor:Thanks Jim. Appreciate the clarification Rudi Vansnick:it looks like it is important to have clear view on the data model requests and the need for futher investigation on this topic Emily Taylor:Agree Amr Elsadr:OK. Thanks. :) Amr Elsadr:I'm wondering if there is a sense about the level of consensus amongst the WG on the proposed recommendations? Rudi Vansnick:very good question Jim ... Julie Hedlund:Apologies, but I have to leave to join another call. Rudi Vansnick:requires a lot of thinking ... Julie Hedlund:Thanks everyone! Rudi Vansnick:thanks Julie Emily Taylor:To borrow from the Dispute Resolution world, it could also be language of the Registrar agreement :) Jim Galvin:I have to leave for another call. See you next week. Rudi Vansnick:thanks to you Chris for the great work Emily Taylor:Thank you for your comments and chairing, Chris. Very useful call Amr Elsadr:Thanks Chris and all. Bye. Jennifer Chung:Thank you Chris and everyone. Mary Wong:Thanks for attending and participating, everyone. Chris Dillon:Thank you very much indeed!

2 1

FW: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] Themes for discussion
by Dillon, Chris Aug. 11, 2014

Aug. 11, 2014

Sorry! This time with attachment.] Dear colleagues, As promised during our last call, I am recirculating the latest version of the recommendations and the points identified so far for discussion, in preparation for Thursday's meeting. Please feel free to circulate any other themes you spot as you read the recommendations to this mailing list. Regards, Chris. From: <Dillon>, Chris Dillon <c.dillon(a)ucl.ac.uk<mailto:c.dillon@ucl.ac.uk>> Date: Wednesday, 30 July 2014 10:31 To: "gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg@icann.org>" <gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg@icann.org>> Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] Themes for discussion Dear colleagues, I would like to assemble here some themes for discussion during tomorrow's call, apart from the purposes/accuracy one that has already come up (see my earlier email below). Here are some other themes I am aware of: · Should we recommend that there should be an option for registrants voluntarily to input transformed contact information? · Should we recommend that something be done with legacy transformed contact information (i.e. contact information input using a different policy from what we are recommending)? · It seems likely that our recommendations for those cases when transformation occurs will not be binding. That would mean, for example, that C5 on when the policy comes into effect would need to be redrafted. · What should happen to transformed contact information created by other stakeholders? O2 may need redrafting. Please send any additional themes for discussion to this mailing list. I've attached the recommendations for your convenience. Regards, Chris. From: owner-gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg(a)icann.org<mailto:owner-gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg@icann.org> [mailto:owner-gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg@icann.org] On Behalf Of Dillon, Chris Sent: 25 July 2014 11:00 To: gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg@icann.org> Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] Purpose and accuracy Dear colleagues, Ideally we need to add something about the purposes of contact information that require accuracy and those that don't. The Final report from the EWG on gTLD Directory Services has a good list of purposes from p.19-34. The Study to evaluate solutions for the submission and display of internationalized contact data has a useful section on Information accuracy for effective use on p.9 with three levels of accuracy suggested: 1. Requiring accurate transformation (e.g. valid in a court of law, matching information in a passport, matching information in legal incorporation etc.) 2. Requiring consistent transformation (allowing use of such information to match other information provided in another context, e.g. to match address information to a registrant on a Google map, etc.) 3. Requiring ad hoc transformation (allowing informal or casual version of the information in another language to provide more general accessibility) The last sentence of the study is of particular interest to us from the accuracy point of view and also from its summary of the state of the transformation tools etc.: "The study has found that provisioning and querying protocols are lacking either support or deployment for internationalized registration data, and that the tools tested are not providing a high level of transformation accuracy and consistency of internationalized registration data." Do we need a better analysis of purposes and accuracy? Does one exist? Incidentally, see https://community.icann.org/display/tatcipdp/7+Studies+and+Background+Docum… for links to the reports mentioned above. Regards, Chris. -- Research Associate in Linguistic Computing, Centre for Digital Humanities, UCL, Gower St, London WC1E 6BT Tel +44 20 7679 1599 (int 31599) www.ucl.ac.uk/dis/people/chrisdillon<http://www.ucl.ac.uk/dis/people/chrisdillon>

1 0

Re: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] Themes for discussion
by Dillon, Chris Aug. 11, 2014

Aug. 11, 2014

Dear colleagues, As promised during our last call, I am recirculating the latest version of the recommendations and the points identified so far for discussion, in preparation for Thursday's meeting. Please feel free to circulate any other themes you spot as you read the recommendations to this mailing list. Regards, Chris. From: <Dillon>, Chris Dillon <c.dillon(a)ucl.ac.uk<mailto:c.dillon@ucl.ac.uk>> Date: Wednesday, 30 July 2014 10:31 To: "gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg@icann.org>" <gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg@icann.org>> Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] Themes for discussion Dear colleagues, I would like to assemble here some themes for discussion during tomorrow's call, apart from the purposes/accuracy one that has already come up (see my earlier email below). Here are some other themes I am aware of: · Should we recommend that there should be an option for registrants voluntarily to input transformed contact information? · Should we recommend that something be done with legacy transformed contact information (i.e. contact information input using a different policy from what we are recommending)? · It seems likely that our recommendations for those cases when transformation occurs will not be binding. That would mean, for example, that C5 on when the policy comes into effect would need to be redrafted. · What should happen to transformed contact information created by other stakeholders? O2 may need redrafting. Please send any additional themes for discussion to this mailing list. I've attached the recommendations for your convenience. Regards, Chris. From: owner-gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg(a)icann.org<mailto:owner-gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg@icann.org> [mailto:owner-gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg@icann.org] On Behalf Of Dillon, Chris Sent: 25 July 2014 11:00 To: gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg@icann.org> Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] Purpose and accuracy Dear colleagues, Ideally we need to add something about the purposes of contact information that require accuracy and those that don't. The Final report from the EWG on gTLD Directory Services has a good list of purposes from p.19-34. The Study to evaluate solutions for the submission and display of internationalized contact data has a useful section on Information accuracy for effective use on p.9 with three levels of accuracy suggested: 1. Requiring accurate transformation (e.g. valid in a court of law, matching information in a passport, matching information in legal incorporation etc.) 2. Requiring consistent transformation (allowing use of such information to match other information provided in another context, e.g. to match address information to a registrant on a Google map, etc.) 3. Requiring ad hoc transformation (allowing informal or casual version of the information in another language to provide more general accessibility) The last sentence of the study is of particular interest to us from the accuracy point of view and also from its summary of the state of the transformation tools etc.: "The study has found that provisioning and querying protocols are lacking either support or deployment for internationalized registration data, and that the tools tested are not providing a high level of transformation accuracy and consistency of internationalized registration data." Do we need a better analysis of purposes and accuracy? Does one exist? Incidentally, see https://community.icann.org/display/tatcipdp/7+Studies+and+Background+Docum… for links to the reports mentioned above. Regards, Chris. -- Research Associate in Linguistic Computing, Centre for Digital Humanities, UCL, Gower St, London WC1E 6BT Tel +44 20 7679 1599 (int 31599) www.ucl.ac.uk/dis/people/chrisdillon<http://www.ucl.ac.uk/dis/people/chrisdillon>

1 0

REMINDER: PLEASE RSVP Monthly GNSO WG Newcomer Open House Session
by Nathalie Peregrine Aug. 4, 2014

Aug. 4, 2014

Reminder: Monthly GNSO WG Newcomer Open House Session These ongoing monthly sessions are for new GNSO WG participants to come together and discuss any questions they may have about GNSO Working Groups, procedures and/or processes. We know there is a lot of information to digest when you join a GNSO Working Group and these monthly meetings are an opportunity for newcomers and more experienced participants to meet in an informal setting without the pressure of "real work" that needs be done. The agenda is flexible. The presenters will be ready with a standard set of materials if people would like to discuss them. Feel free to submit questions, either in advance or at the beginning of the meeting, if there is a topic that you would like to explore in more depth . Providing useful answers to a wide range of questions is part of the reason why these meetings are Thursday 7 August at 12.00 UTC Thursday 4 September at 20.00 UTC Thursday 2 October at 12.00 UTC Thursday 6 November at 20.00 UTC Thursday 4 December at 12.00 UTC To convert to your local time zone, please see http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/converter.html If you are interested to join the next meeting on 7 August or any of the future meetings, please let the GNSO Secretariat know ( <mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org> gnso-secs(a)icann.org) and we will send you the call details. If there are any specific questions you already have, or any overviews or introductions you think would be helpful (e.g. GNSO Policy Development Process or GNSO Working Group guidelines), please let us know in advance and we will prepare materials accordingly. Feel free to share this invitation with others that you think may be interested. We look forward to welcoming you at the next meeting! Nathalie Peregrine GNSO Secretariat

1 0

Themes for discussion
by Dillon, Chris July 30, 2014

July 30, 2014

Dear colleagues, I would like to assemble here some themes for discussion during tomorrow’s call, apart from the purposes/accuracy one that has already come up (see my earlier email below). Here are some other themes I am aware of: · Should we recommend that there should be an option for registrants voluntarily to input transformed contact information? · Should we recommend that something be done with legacy transformed contact information (i.e. contact information input using a different policy from what we are recommending)? · It seems likely that our recommendations for those cases when transformation occurs will not be binding. That would mean, for example, that C5 on when the policy comes into effect would need to be redrafted. · What should happen to transformed contact information created by other stakeholders? O2 may need redrafting. Please send any additional themes for discussion to this mailing list. I’ve attached the recommendations for your convenience. Regards, Chris. From: owner-gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg(a)icann.org [mailto:owner-gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg@icann.org] On Behalf Of Dillon, Chris Sent: 25 July 2014 11:00 To: gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg(a)icann.org Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] Purpose and accuracy Dear colleagues, Ideally we need to add something about the purposes of contact information that require accuracy and those that don't. The Final report from the EWG on gTLD Directory Services has a good list of purposes from p.19-34. The Study to evaluate solutions for the submission and display of internationalized contact data has a useful section on Information accuracy for effective use on p.9 with three levels of accuracy suggested: 1. Requiring accurate transformation (e.g. valid in a court of law, matching information in a passport, matching information in legal incorporation etc.) 2. Requiring consistent transformation (allowing use of such information to match other information provided in another context, e.g. to match address information to a registrant on a Google map, etc.) 3. Requiring ad hoc transformation (allowing informal or casual version of the information in another language to provide more general accessibility) The last sentence of the study is of particular interest to us from the accuracy point of view and also from its summary of the state of the transformation tools etc.: "The study has found that provisioning and querying protocols are lacking either support or deployment for internationalized registration data, and that the tools tested are not providing a high level of transformation accuracy and consistency of internationalized registration data." Do we need a better analysis of purposes and accuracy? Does one exist? Incidentally, see https://community.icann.org/display/tatcipdp/7+Studies+and+Background+Docum… for links to the reports mentioned above. Regards, Chris. -- Research Associate in Linguistic Computing, Centre for Digital Humanities, UCL, Gower St, London WC1E 6BT Tel +44 20 7679 1599 (int 31599) www.ucl.ac.uk/dis/people/chrisdillon<http://www.ucl.ac.uk/dis/people/chrisdillon>

1 0

regrets for next two weeks
by James Galvin July 26, 2014

July 26, 2014

I will be on vacation and offline the next two weeks and therefore will not make the next two calls. See you all on 14 August 2014. Jim

1 0

Purpose and accuracy
by Dillon, Chris July 25, 2014

July 25, 2014

Dear colleagues, Ideally we need to add something about the purposes of contact information that require accuracy and those that don't. The Final report from the EWG on gTLD Directory Services has a good list of purposes from p.19-34. The Study to evaluate solutions for the submission and display of internationalized contact data has a useful section on Information accuracy for effective use on p.9 with three levels of accuracy suggested: 1. Requiring accurate transformation (e.g. valid in a court of law, matching information in a passport, matching information in legal incorporation etc.) 2. Requiring consistent transformation (allowing use of such information to match other information provided in another context, e.g. to match address information to a registrant on a Google map, etc.) 3. Requiring ad hoc transformation (allowing informal or casual version of the information in another language to provide more general accessibility) The last sentence of the study is of particular interest to us from the accuracy point of view and also from its summary of the state of the transformation tools etc.: "The study has found that provisioning and querying protocols are lacking either support or deployment for internationalized registration data, and that the tools tested are not providing a high level of transformation accuracy and consistency of internationalized registration data." Do we need a better analysis of purposes and accuracy? Does one exist? Incidentally, see https://community.icann.org/display/tatcipdp/7+Studies+and+Background+Docum… for links to the reports mentioned above. Regards, Chris. -- Research Associate in Linguistic Computing, Centre for Digital Humanities, UCL, Gower St, London WC1E 6BT Tel +44 20 7679 1599 (int 31599) www.ucl.ac.uk/dis/people/chrisdillon<http://www.ucl.ac.uk/dis/people/chrisdillon>

1 0

MP3 Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information PDP WG meeting - 24 July 2014
by Nathalie Peregrine July 24, 2014

July 24, 2014

Dear All, Please find the MP3 recording for the Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information PDP Working Group call held on Thursday 24 July at 1300 UTC at: http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-transliteration-contact-20140724-en.mp3 On page: http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar#jul The recordings and transcriptions of the calls are posted on the GNSO Master Calendar page: <http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/> http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/ Attendees: Pitinan Kooarmornpatana - GAC Petter Rindforth – IPC Chris Dillon – NCSG Ubolthip Sethakaset – Individual Peter Dernbach – IPC Mae Suchayapim Siriwat – GAC Wanawit Ahkuputra – GAC Justine Chew - Individual Wolf-Ulrich Knoben – ISPCP Thitikorn Apologies: Jim Galvin – SSAC ICANN staff: Julie Hedlund Amy Bivins Mary Wong Lars Hoffmann Nathalie Peregrine ** Please let me know if your name has been left off the list ** Wiki page: <http://tinyurl.com/mpwxstx> http://tinyurl.com/mpwxstx Thank you. Kind regards, Nathalie GNSO Secretariat Adobe Chat Transcript for Thursday 24 July 2014: Nathalie Peregrine:Welcome to the Translation and Transliteration PDP WG meeting on Thursday 24July 2014 Chris Dillon:Hello, all Pitinan Kooarmornpatana:hi Chris Pitinan Kooarmornpatana:Hi all Lars Hoffmann:hi chris - i made you presented (as per note that i sent earlier) Chris Dillon:Thank you, Lars. Julie Hedlund:HI everyone -- I'm waiting to get on the call. Chris Dillon:Same here Julie Hedlund:They must have a different meaning for the word "momentarily" since I think its been longer than that now! Chris Dillon:Let's hope they're waiting for the hour Julie Hedlund:Finally in! Nathalie Peregrine:i have awrned the operator Petter Rindforth:Lucky you... Petter Rindforth:I'm here now :-) Mary Wong:@Chris, at least in Singapore we have Arctic-strength airoonditioning :) Chris Dillon:True! Justine Chew:Hi, sorry I'm late in joining. Peter Dernbach:Hello all. Just joined the call. Nathalie Peregrine:Hello, Peter! Justine Chew:No worries, Chris, I for one appreciate your efforts in putting this straw man v6 together! Pitinan Kooarmornpatana:Thank you very much Chris Peter Dernbach:Thank you all. Pitinan Kooarmornpatana:thanks... bye all Julie Hedlund:Thank you everyone! Have a nice day! Chris Dillon:Goodbye all.

1 0

Draft recommendations and next meetings
by Dillon, Chris July 24, 2014

July 24, 2014

Dear colleagues, Since the ICANN London meeting I have been drafting a recommendation document on translation and transliteration of contact information with the much appreciated support of Lars, Julie, Marika Konings and others. I am intending to present it at today's meeting. I shall circulate it about two hours before the meeting (earlier if possible). I then have another meeting until ours starts, so I will be out of contact. The draft is likely to generate quite a bit of discussion. I'm keen that this is largely done in writing to this list, so that new versions may be discussed during our meetings on 31 July and 14 August. I am travelling on 7 August and so can't make our meeting. It may still be possible to run that meeting, if Rudi is free. Incidentally, I had been thinking that we were coming out of our "read relevant documents" phase, but the drafting has indicated a couple of documents we still need to look at. Until later. Regards, Chris. -- Research Associate in Linguistic Computing, Centre for Digital Humanities, UCL, Gower St, London WC1E 6BT Tel +44 20 7679 1599 (int 31599) www.ucl.ac.uk/dis/people/chrisdillon<http://www.ucl.ac.uk/dis/people/chrisdillon>

4 4

Transformation required at the validation stage?
by Dillon, Chris July 18, 2014

July 18, 2014

Dear colleagues, I just listened to last Thursday's call. It sounds as if you covered a lot of ground, although I haven't yet checked whether the FAQs Rudi circulated contain anything that didn't come up on the pages I highlighted as important for us as I read the Final report from the EWG on gTLD Directory Services. At one point Jim Galvin asked whether transformation would be required at the validation stage. I would say no to that question. The original language/script data are primary and suitable for validation. It's not that transformed data cannot be validated, but they need to be high quality (outside Greek, Cyrillic and alphabetic scripts often created by human being rather than a computer). Actually I think Rudi made a similar point later in the call, but just to clarify that. Regards, Chris. -- Research Associate in Linguistic Computing, Centre for Digital Humanities, UCL, Gower St, London WC1E 6BT Tel +44 20 7679 1599 (int 31599) www.ucl.ac.uk/dis/people/chrisdillon<http://www.ucl.ac.uk/dis/people/chrisdillon>

2 2