Dear Chris, Thank you for your helpful reply. To your first question, the need for inclusion of non-ASCII contact data is to enable those people who use non-ASCII scripts to be able to access those data. For example, if I use the Arabic script, I may still wish to be able to contact the domain name registration owner. If that contact information is only in ASCII script, it may not be accessible to me. If, however, it can appear in a non-ASCII script, then I will be able to see and use the information. The issue in the PDP how should this be accomplished and who should bear the burden. Also, should one simply transliterate the information, or should one also translate it? The IRD-WG didn't address security implications concerning the provision of non-ASCII data, but the Charter DT could decide whether that is in the scope of the work for the PDP-WG. It may be, however, that the issue of security of internationalized registration data in general will be covered under another WG. In particular, there is a WG that is starting up that is tasked with determining the requirements for internationalized registration data (IRD) and producing a data model for IRD. It relates to the task in the Board's Action Plan relating to its 08 November 2012 resolution that directed staff to: 1) task a working group to determine the appropriate internationalized domain name registration data requirements, evaluating any relevant recommendations from the SSAC or GNSO; 2) produce a data model that includes (any) requirements for the translation or transliteration of the registration data, taking into account the results of any PDP initiated by the GNSO on translation/ transliteration, and the standardized replacement protocol under development in the IETF¹s Webbased Extensible Internet Registration Data Working Group; 3) evaluate available solutions (including solutions being implemented by ccTLDs). Thus, the results of the PDP on translation and transliteration of contact information will be considered by this WG. To your second question, the 5th model was suggested not by the IRD-WG but in a comment received in the public form on the preliminary report when it was published. Thus, it was not part one of the models discussed in the original report. I hope that this is helpful. Best regards, Julie From: <Dillon>, Chris <c.dillon@ucl.ac.uk> Date: Wednesday, August 14, 2013 5:33 AM To: Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org>, "gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg@icann.org" <gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg@icann.org> Subject: RE: FOR REVIEW: Draft PDP WG Charter Dear Julie, It¹s really great to have this draft so soon and it includes a really good summary of the documents and the procedures now necessary. I¹m not sure whether the following should be in the document, but I am interested in what is driving the need for inclusion of non-ASCII data, probably security considerations. I feel these are relevant, as they may help to motivate whoever ends up providing the additional data required for a new format. For example, there was/is a proposal for a traffic light system in which websites providing certain information could be considered more secure (greener) than those that didn¹t (redder). I was interested to see all five models listed on p.4, but am curious about why one of the models was originally relegated to a note on the last page of The final issue report: translation and transliteration of contact information¹, whereas the other four models were fully developed in the report. Regards, Chris. -- Research Associate in Linguistic Computing, Dept of Information Studies, UCL, Gower St, London WC1E 6BT Tel +44 20 7679 1599 (int 31599) ucl.ac.uk/dis/people/chrisdillon From: owner-gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg@icann.org [mailto:owner-gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg@icann.org] On Behalf Of Julie Hedlund Sent: 14 August 2013 00:04 To: gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg@icann.org Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] FOR REVIEW: Draft PDP WG Charter Importance: High Dear members of the Charter Drafting Team, Per our actions below from our first meeting, attached you will find a draft charter for your review and for discussion at our next meeting on Thursday, 15 August 1500 UTC (08:00 PDT, 11:00 EDT, 16:00 London, 17:00 CEST). A meeting notification with teleconference information has been sent separately. Actions: 1. Selecting Chair/Co-Chairs: During today's meeting Chris Dillon and Rudi Vansnick volunteered to be co-chairs. Please let us know if others would like to volunteer and/or support Chris and Rudi. 2. Draft Charter: Staff will provide a draft charter for review by COB Tuesday, 13 August. It will be posted in the wiki and in the Adobe Connect room for discussion at the meeting on 15 August. (DONE attached) Please let me know if you have any questions. Best regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director