Dear All, Please find the MP3 recording for the Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information PDP Working Group call held on Tuesday 2 June 2015 at 13:00 UTC at: http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-transliteration-contact-02jun15-en.mp3<http://mailer.samanage.com/wf/click?upn=NrFWbrBstcrPWP369qgbqlXiSKeL20xnUXzI03ZqpstVYEtAkUhnqHJbcMva2zeHXPBYS28IAQ-2BFDnoOG2tPq034BYs7yyRw5z9U5OfTu8M-3D_QuA5zZR9ZZ7J1F2FeF-2FOsgm1hgIDcBrAX2P7Ezxmql7ckJc4ios1-2BxObAoz2rzLSI3c4QB1NGo7bw7XrBjpRCbz74w4vzk48UxZMFoBBQBQaQ0ePdiOjdJ30sQNHkokOf-2F2p-2FBvMgKvMhzp-2B4u8fP-2BRrSytHe2KCf2HpQmtSbpezMgNTUG57PiORAPesOotpHA-2BC4pSmXJRsVmpbNaLqzqxxpN8od-2BN5fPdm0-2FYAH4zYeaUMwz8UBnn4983WltnVPpBLM1qgZuuVsmstTm4KrHikAUxK4HZH-2FSjYYv0qBVNcUCU7IcRkVV6oNVx62Z5hDNl5VaBJmCGYJgi9s3zX6TKHB1-2F3OrMqAEE-2Fy6Wr2atjGGu5oxrLe9k8VgMJj0DZcrdY95ZoKdI0UQ7RitYlIWUAocfHlrSwPJHNfmJ6ULtU8q2we5kxvEXCqM9ovecgVl1FWP-2BM2aNz1tjwCOhW4SA5KVMcQzPJYmhkozXb7KhvQKdy4Za9u7A8X7QP7Yq2> On page: <http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar#may>http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar#j<http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar#jun>un<http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar#jun> The recordings and transcriptions of the calls are posted on the GNSO Master Calendar page:http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar Attendees: Chris Dillon – NCSG Sara Bockey – RrSG Ubolthip Sethakaset – Individual Amr Elsadr – NCUC Peter Green (Zhang Zuan) – NCUC Justine Chew – Individual Jim Galvin - RySG Apologies: Petter Rindforth – IPC Wen Zhai - ICANN Staff Julie Hedlund Lars Hoffmann Glen de St Gery Nathalie Peregrine ** Please let me know if your name has been left off the list ** Wiki page: http://tinyurl.com/mpwxstx Thank you. Kind regards, Nathalie Adobe Chat Transcript for Tuesday 2 June 2015: Nathalie Peregrine:Welcome to the Translation and Transliteration PDP Working Group on Thursday, 2nd June 2015 Jim Galvin:hi ... dialing in now Jim Galvin:and now on the line Jim Galvin:no problem waiting a bit longer given the special time Rudi Vansnick:indeed, sometimes Adobe is not willing to allow you to conect Chris Dillon:But we love it really Justine Chew:Hello, are we short on participants? Chris Dillon:A little, but I'm not for giving up Peter Green (CONAC):Hi Sorry for being late Lars Hoffmann:i agree with Jim that the *could* should go. Lars Hoffmann:also it will become 'preliminary' should be taken off. Rudi Vansnick:i would also prefer to remove "could" but I'm not a native english speaker Rudi Vansnick:unlikely to exist soon : do not forget the timing of this report being approved is approx a few months from now ... Rudi Vansnick:at their own expense ... Sara Bockey:Is statement "consistency would be an issue" truly necessary. If we are recommending it is not desirable and at the requesters expense, and not public, is this last sentence necessary? Amr Elsadr:Apologies for being late. Had another meeting that ran longer than expected. Justine Chew 2:Any parties requiring SUCH transformation are free to do it ad hoc outside the Whois replacement system at their own expense while ensuring their exercise meets their exact transformation requirements. Amr Elsadr:If our recommendations are meant to be implemented immediately, there's no need to really describe it as the "whois replacement". Lars Hoffmann:@jim +1 Amr Elsadr:Agree with Jim. Sara Bockey:@Jim +1 Jim Galvin:Could be numbers for example. Amr Elsadr:"supported by" is what I'm seeing in the AC room. Amr Elsadr:Would we like to pluralize "language or script" in rec #3? Rudi Vansnick:at the end it is the registrar who offers a platform (form) for registration based on their knowledge of languages Amr Elsadr:@Rudi: +1 Sara Bockey:Yes, it seems to go against universal acceptance a bit Amr Elsadr:@Chris: That sounds good to me. :) Amr Elsadr:@Chris: +1 Jim Galvin:I understand the desire to "protect" registrars from the requirement that they might have to support all languages and scripts. Jim Galvin:I think that might be part of what is hidden in this recommendation. I'm wondering if we could say it differently, although I don't have a suggestion offhand which is why I was inclined to drop it. Amr Elsadr:@Jim: Yes..., a requirement to support all languages/scripts would be especially burdensome on local up and coming registrars trying to serve their local communities. Amr Elsadr:..., which would probably also be reflected on the registrants paying for the services they are (or aren't) receiving. Amr Elsadr:Not a suspicion. It's a bottom line. Registrars are businesses, not charities. :) Jim Galvin:+1 chris Jim Galvin:do we mean "consistent" or "self-consistent"? Justine Chew 2:what about "identified"? Amr Elsadr:For the record, I'm fine with "tagged". Jim Galvin:I'm also fine with tagged. Amr Elsadr:@Jim: Not sure what you mean by self-consistent? Amr Elsadr:Consistency is an RAA requirement. Response consistency was also an issue addressed by the "thick" whois PDP in that context. Amr Elsadr:Consistency in the RAA is against standards made clear in the 2013 RAA. Justine Chew 2:@Jim: I think the term "self-consistent" has a less clear meaning than "consistent" Jim Galvin:If that's our definition of consistency we should say that. I'm thinking a footnote that "defines" consistency is needed. Amr Elsadr:@Jim: +1. Sounds good. Rudi Vansnick:@Jim : +1 Justine Chew 2:Fine with me. Rudi Vansnick:so 1 to 4 : closed discssion ? Rudi Vansnick:ok Jim Galvin:@Amr +1 Rudi Vansnick:just something that comes to my mind : rec#1 : how could one see the registrar has transformed the contact data at their own expense ? Amr Elsadr:@Rudi: That's an interesting question. The registrant could submit a second set of transformed data that the registrar can display. Sara Bockey:Does rec #5 run against rec #3? Registrant is not necessarily providing local script, but script supported by the registrar Jim Galvin:Going back to Amr's original point, what needs to happen is we need to know what is the "original authoritative data". Jim Galvin:Then all other data is "transformed", it needs to be flagged as such, and the source of the transformation needs to be noted. Amr Elsadr:@Jim: +1. Pointing out the authoritative set would eliminate the concern behind who transformed the second set of data. Jim Galvin:So the display is "two blocks" of the same data, flagged appropriately. Jim Galvin:@Amr - there's not necessarily a concern about who transformed the data but I think it would be useful to know the source. Rudi Vansnick:@Jim : +1 Amr Elsadr:@Jim: Yes. Although the source of the transformation is helpful, do we want to recommend a contractual requirement to display this? This is porbably a question the WG needs to answer. Sara Bockey:@Amr - agree Jim Galvin:@Amr - additional discussion would be good. I think it would be helpful but would like to hear other points of view Amr Elsadr:I agree that it "might" be helpful. It does not necessarily guarantee any added accuracy, though. This depends on the arbitrary ability of whoever is performing the transformation. Sara Bockey:thank you everyone! Jim Galvin:bye thanks all Rudi Vansnick:thanks a lot Chris Amr Elsadr:Thanks all. Bye. Peter Green (CONAC):bye all Chris Dillon:Many thanks and goodbye till Thursday.