Dear Rudy, I agree we should let the WG decide if they want to run with one of the models, or another one. I'm just wondering whether we should add a sentence to make it clear that they are not tied to the five models. I also agree that questions like my sample one is their work. 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 Rudi Vansnick Sent: 22 August 2013 09:36 To: Dillon, Chris Cc: Julie Hedlund; gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg@icann.org Subject: Re: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] RE: REMINDER FOR REVIEW: Revised Draft PDP WG Charter Dear Chris, As you said the document drafted by Julie is great and is not easy to improve. All is covered as far as I understand the principles of the duty of the draft team. It is up to the WG to elaborate responses to the given questions and issues. I would let the WG decide if they want to extend the 5 present models. It would require some investigation for us to define a sixth model, that perhaps was already discussed previously and was not withhold. Interesting sample question ... a lot to discuss but isn't that the duty of the WG ? We are only the charter drafting team ... Till later today. Rudi Vansnick Chair NPOC Policy Committee - ICANN - www.npoc.org<http://www.npoc.org/> Mobile +32/(0)475/28.16.32 - Tel +32/(0)9/329.39.16 rudi.vansnick@isoc.be<mailto:rudi.vansnick@isoc.be> Op 22-aug.-2013, om 09:12 heeft "Dillon, Chris" <c.dillon@ucl.ac.uk<mailto:c.dillon@ucl.ac.uk>> het volgende geschreven: Dear colleagues, Julie's drafting is difficult to improve. However, I wonder if it would be good to have a line explicitly indicating that the PDP WG will be free to modify the five alternatives in Section II, effectively creating a sixth one which is recommended/preferred. Beyond that my mind is starting to think about translation/transliteration principles for the representation of contact details (rather than notes for so many languages), but that is probably best left to the PDP WG. An example of a principle might be the answer to the question "What happens if there is more than one Romanization (transliteration) for a language in common use?". Looking forward to speaking later, 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<http://ucl.ac.uk/dis/people/chrisdillon> From: owner-gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg@icann.org<mailto:owner-gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg@icann.org> [mailto:owner-gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg@icann.org<mailto:gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg@icann.org>] On Behalf Of Julie Hedlund Sent: 21 August 2013 20:05 To: gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg@icann.org<mailto:gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg@icann.org> Subject: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] REMINDER FOR REVIEW: Revised Draft PDP WG Charter Importance: High Dear members of the Charter Drafting Team, This is a reminder that per our actions from our meeting that week, attached you will find a revised draft charter for your review and for discussion at our next meeting on Thursday, 22 August 1500 UTC (08:00 PDT, 11:00 EDT, 16:00 London, 17:00 CEST). The changes are reflected as redlines. This also is posted on wiki at: https://community.icann.org/display/tatcipdp/22+August+2013. Please let me know if you have any questions. Best regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director