Hi all, thanks for all the comments and discussions. I would like to clarify one important point to avoid confusion during the discussions: We are not talking about whether we need the same entity principle at the second level. That is a given. Without that, the whole PDP becomes moot. All Recs in some way or another rely on this requirement. For example, if we don't require the same entity at the second level, there is also no need at the top level and there's no need for bundling the TLDs in the first place. User confusion for the TLD only materialises in SLDs. You won't see a stand-alone TLD in the wild, neither in web domains nor in e-mail addresses. All domains in use are at least SLDs (or deeper levels). So, what we are discussing right now is the definition of the ASCII/Latin Diacritic Domain Set (as defined in Rec 39). The question is, what should be included in that set and what not. And in particular the question whether diacritics need to be included or not. Whatever will be included in the end, will have the same entity requirement (Rec 40). Talk to you later today. Cheers, Michael -- ____________________________________________________________________ | | | knipp | Knipp Medien und Kommunikation GmbH ------- Technologiepark Martin-Schmeisser-Weg 9 44227 Dortmund Germany Dipl.-Informatiker Fon: +49 231 9703-0 Fax: +49 231 9703-200 Dr. Michael Bauland SIP: Michael.Bauland@knipp.de Software Development E-mail: Michael.Bauland@knipp.de Register Court: Amtsgericht Dortmund, HRB 13728 Chief Executive Officers: Dietmar Knipp, Elmar Knipp Certified according DIN ISO/IEC 27001:2017