Dear EPDP Team, During our meeting on 28 April 2022, there was support for forming a small group to develop examples to assist the EPDP Team’s deliberation on charter questions E3, E1, and E3a. These questions are related to whether/how the string similarity review should be adjusted due to the implementation of variants. Specifically, the small team is expected to develop concrete examples of strings and variants that are visually confusable, and demonstrate how they would be compared against each other based on the three levels of string similarity review<https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/192217199/EPDP%20Team%20Mee...>. The goal of this exercise is to help transform a largely academic discussion of abstract concepts into a more comprehensible discussion with practical examples. This may help the Team better analyze the three levels’ impact on string similarity review, as well as their potential consequences. Anyone on the EPDP Team is welcome to volunteer to be part of the small team. Participation of members with familiarity or expertise in languages / scripts that have variants would be highly appreciated. As a refresher, the languages/scripts that have both allocatable and blocked variants according to the RZ-LGR are: * Arabic * Bengali * Chinese * Greek * Latin (German and Turkish have allocatable variants) * Myanmar * Tamil The languages/scripts that only have blocked variants are: * Armenian * Cyrillic * Devanagari * Ethiopic * Gurmukhi * Hebrew * Japanese * Kannada * Khmer * Korean * Malayalam * Oriya * Sinhala * Telugu If you are interested in being part of this small group, please email gnso-secs@icann.org<mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org> by EOB Friday, 6 May. Thank you, Steve, Emily, Ariel