Hi folks, I think it'd be best to maintain a single "master" document (the current one), instead of having potentially several different Word .doc files floating around that are not in sync with one another, and that would need to be merged in some manner. If folks have proposed "edits", simply sending the proposed changes themselves (inline within an email, in plain text, ASCII, via email) saves everyone time, since the focus is squarely on the changes. One would not have to constantly download and re-read 10 page documents (conceivably with multiple versions reflecting different edits) to ask oneself "what is being changed?" Suggested format: (a) Page X, point/paragraph/section N, change A to B, (b) Page Y, point/paragraph/section M, delete C, add D etc. Also, there are unfortunately more security issues in relation to MS Word documents than there are for PDFs. Plain text (ASCII) has the fewest security concerns. Sincerely, George Kirikos 416-588-0269 http://www.leap.com/ On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 7:56 AM, BECKHAM, Brian <brian.beckham@wipo.int> wrote:
Thanks Mary,
Now that we’ve made progress on the high-level topics/questions in the far left column (as one example: “C. THE RESPONSE: 1. Duration of response period 2. Other issues relating to Responses (other than issues relating to Defenses), e.g. Default procedures”) presumably there will be an opportunity to provide more specific input on column 3 (Headed: “Suggested New Questions as of ICANN60 and those added at the meetings on 03 January 2018 and on 10 January 2018”).
To facilitate that, would it make sense to send this document around in Word format, for ease of editing and exchange amongst the WG (rather than taking up time on a call to wordsmith)?
Thanks, and hope I’m more or less on the right page in terms of where we are headed.
Brian
From: gnso-rpm-wg [mailto:gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Mary Wong Sent: Saturday, January 13, 2018 12:33 AM To: gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org Subject: Re: [gnso-rpm-wg] Action Items from 10 January Working Group Call
Hello everyone,
Following up from the first action item from the Working Group call this past Wednesday, please find attached the updated draft URS Discussion Document. The document includes the suggestions made on the call for which no objections were received; staff has included notes on these in the table to facilitate your review of the discussion. Staff continues to work on the “parking lot” document that will contain all other suggestions made after the ICANN60 sessions and will circulate that when it is ready. We hope that both documents, along with the session and call recordings and transcripts, will reflect the Working Group’s deliberations to date on scoping a review of the URS.
Thanks and cheers
Mary, Julie, Ariel and Berry
From: gnso-rpm-wg <gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org> Date: Wednesday, January 10, 2018 at 16:47 To: "gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org" <gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org> Subject: [gnso-rpm-wg] Action Items from 10 January Working Group Call
Dear all,
The action items noted by staff from the Working Group call held on 10 January 2018 are as follows:
1. Staff will update the Compilation of Current URS Discussion Documents based on the suggested edits from the 10 January meeting.
2. Staff will work with the Co-Chairs to develop a historical timeline for development of the URS in the New gTLD Program.
Staff will post to the wiki space the action items and notes. Please note that these will be high-level notes and are not meant as a substitute for the transcript or recording. The recording, transcript, Adobe Connect chat, and attendance records are posted on the wiki.
Best regards,
Julie
Julie Hedlund, Policy Director
_______________________________________________ gnso-rpm-wg mailing list gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-wg