- IDN-WG - lists.icann.org

Request for Comments: Draft Roadmap for Universal Acceptance of TLDs
by Satish Babu June 30, 2014

June 30, 2014

Dear all ICANN has invited comments from the community on the Universal Acceptance Initiative draft roadmap, available here: https://www.icann.org/public-comments/tld-acceptance-initiative-2014-06-18-… The draft builds on the goal that "...domain names in a TLD must be useable in applications regardless of the written script and length or newness of the TLD", and aims to address UA challenges of all new TLDs including IDNs. The draft document is available for comments until 18 July 2014. Kindly provide visibility for this very important initiative amongst your own TLD, IDN, and language community groups. satish -- Satish Babu APRALO/ICANN

2 2

Public Comment open on Universal Acceptance
by Rinalia Abdul Rahim June 20, 2014

June 20, 2014

FYI - A response from ICANN on Universal Acceptance. Please comment. https://www.icann.org/public-comments/tld-acceptance-initiative-2014-06-18-… Best regards, Rinalia

2 2

The Problem of IDNs
by Rinalia Abdul Rahim May 21, 2014

May 21, 2014

Colleagues, This is the link to a recent APTLD Report on a survey involving ccTLDs regarding use of IDNs - http://aptld.org/system/files/survey_report_-_launch_and_use_of_idns_2014.p…. It has statistics from the Asia Pacific and European regions. End user awareness is scored lowest and there is feedback on barriers that limit broad adoption by end users. At the basic level, the problem is that IDNs are not available for use in email, browsers and other applications used by users. Efforts to address the problem are distributed among many parties and they are un-coordinated. There has been some discussions at ICANN on what needs to be done and the role of ICANN. The challenge for ICANN is that it doesn't deal with application level problems. Nevertheless, the successful adoption of IDN TLDs is arguably a success measure for ICANN's TLD programme, so ICANN has a stake in seeing IDNs succeed. Various suggestions have been made on ICANN's role including convene meetings on the topic, raise awareness about the problem through communications channels, gather and centralize information on efforts underway to inform the community, and coordinate the disparate efforts of un-connected parties, etc. *If there are thoughts on what the role of ICANN should be vis-a-vis the role of the community to address the problem of IDN adoption (as part of solving the Universal Acceptance problem), please share.* *APRALO and APTLD: Perhaps a collaboration on way forward to enhance end user awareness and encourage applications developers to meet the market demand? * Best regards, Rinalia <http://aptld.org/system/files/survey_report_-_launch_and_use_of_idns_2014.p…>

13 14

Report on APTLD Workshop on IDN Universal Acceptance
by Rinalia Abdul Rahim May 20, 2014

May 20, 2014

FYI: Report on the APTLD workshop on IDN Universal Acceptance held 11 May 2014 in Muscat, Oman. Rinalia

1 0

Universal Acceptance of All TLDs
by Rinalia Abdul Rahim May 20, 2014

May 20, 2014

FYI > http://www.circleid.com/posts/20140519_universal_acceptance_of_all_tlds_now/ > > > > A piece by Stéphane Van Gelder on Universal Acceptance of TLDs. > > > > > > Universal acceptance of top level domains hasn't really meant much to most Internet users up until now. As long as .COM was basically the default TLD, there wasn't much of an issue. > > > > No longer. With 263 delegated strings (according to ICANN's May 12, 2014 statistics) adding to the existing 22 gTLDs that were already live on the net after the 2004 round of Internet namespace expansion, the problem of universal acceptance gets very real. > > > > What is the issue? Being able to use any TLD with any browser (Safari, Chrome, Firefox...) or email client (outlook, Apple mail...), no matter what the environment (Mac, Windows...). Non-ASCII Internationalized Domain Names (IDNs) have made the issue even more crucial because universal acceptance is needed to fulfil their promise: giving millions of people who use different keyboards and scripts access to an "own language" Internet use they've never been able to experience up until now. > > > > Non-Latin script TLDs are considered one of the most important Internet naming innovations of the last decade because they are key to reducing the digital divide between those who are comfortable typing ASCII web addresses and those who are not. Those whose native alphabets are Chinese, Arabic, Cyrillic or others have jumped at the chance to type their own scripts into the address bars. The high registration volumes reached by IDN ccTLDs like .рф (Romanised as .RF for Russian Federation) or more recently the Chinese character new gTLDs launched by TLD Registry .在线 (.ONLINE) and .中文网 (.WEBSITE) are clear indications of the pent-up demand for non-Latin script web addresses. > > > > > > Ensuring new web addresses can be used everywhere, by everyone > > > > Because they are that important, ICANN's new gTLD program has given deliberate priority to IDNs. The 104 applications for non-Latin script TLDs were allowed a faster track through the evaluation and delegation process if they wanted it. > > > > Despite that, most new gTLDs that have gone live so far are of the traditional ASCII kind. But as TLD Registry's suffixes show, the Internet is not going to stay all-Latin for long. Others also have ambitious plans to bring Internet navigation to new audiences using different alphabets. Stable Tone is one such registry operator. It will soon be launching 世界, (.WORLD in Chinese) with an innovative plan to bring international brands to Chinese audiences. > > > > Without universal acceptance, those plans will suffer. The products will be out there, but their intended audiences won't actually be able to use them. Why? Because in many ways, the Internet still works as if there had never been an expansion of its namespace. There are 3 main issues. > > > > Internet browsers tend to carry out summary checks when a destination is typed into their address bars. Some browsers will actually filter out anything that doesn't resemble the "classic" TLDs. Type www.example.guru, one of the new TLDs that is already proving very popular, and browsers expecting .COM or something similar will either tack that suffix on the end and search for www.example.guru.com, or take the user to a search engine to try and "help". > > > > The rate of expansion is also an issue. In 2004, only a very limited number of TLDs were added to the Internet root. So as suffixes like .BIZ and .INFO came online, browser developers had time to adjust. But the new gTLD program means an increase of several orders of magnitude for the number of TLDs becoming valid Internet namespaces. How can developers of browser, email and other Internet services keep up? > > > > IDNs have brought a third universal acceptance issue. Users must be able to type, and see, their URLs in the intended native script. If it's a Chinese address, you should be able to type that in as easily as if it was ASCII. Having to resort to some kind of encoder to get the Chinese script complicates the user experience to such an extent that there's a risk users simply won't bother. And that could ultimately mean the failure of IDN TLDs that, ironically, Internet users actually want. > > > > There's a fourth, slightly separate but equally important issue: mobile device use. Browsing and emailing environments tend to be even more technically limited on smartphones and tablets than they are on desktop computers. Yet those are the devices which the next billion Internet users, those that stand to benefit from new TLDs and especially IDNs, are most likely to use. > > > > All that leads to a situation where currently, there is a lack of universal acceptance for these new TLDs. Take those mentioned earlier. A web address like 房地产.在线 (RealEstate.online) simply isn't reachable using the majority of web browsers running on PCs and mobile devices in China. A part-ASCII address like nic.在线 has the same issues. > > > > Chinese data shows that around 50% of the browsers used in the country are not compatible with Chinese IDN gTLDs and that on mobile devices, tha vast majority of the browsers available aren't compatible. > > > > > > Single focus > > > > So what to do? Awareness of the problem isn't new. ICANN, for instance, has been working on it since 2004, when it opened a discussion forum on universal acceptance, and even before. Technically there are no major hurdles to universal acceptance. For example, the technology needed to correctly render IDN web addresses was developed even before the new gTLD program, when work was being done on the IDN ccTLD program designed to give a path to non-ASCII country codes to countries such as Russia, where .рф is considered the second national suffix after the ASCII .RU. > > > > The major stumbling block for universal acceptance today is probably coordination. And let's face it, that's an area where organisations like ICANN have traditionally not been very strong. ICANN, the technical community's IETF, and others, are very good at taking on a variety of problems at once. They are not so good at focusing their collective energies on a single problem. > > > > Yet that's exactly what's needed to guarantee universal acceptance. Across-the-board efforts targeting all aspects of this one problem. For example, if technical operators such as browser developers are not made sufficiently aware of new gTLDs by the governance community, then how can they be expected to adapt their products to suit? > > > > It's incumbent on the technical and governance communities to ensure that demand is met. Disappoint these non-ASCII hopefuls now, and new gTLDs as a whole will suffer the consequences.

1 0

Reminder - please comment on the draft ALAC Statement on the Interim Report Internationalized Registration Data Expert Working Group
by ICANN At-Large Staff May 2, 2014

May 2, 2014

Dear All, Please see Raf Fatani’s message below. Please be so kind to comment on the first draft of the ALAC Statement on the Interim Report Internationalized Registration Data Expert Working Group<https://community.icann.org/x/2TrRAg> in its At-Large Workspace by 05.05.2014 23:59 UTC. Thank you, Heidi Ullrich, Silvia Vivanco, Ariel Liang, Gisella Gruber, Nathalie Peregrine and Terri Agnew ICANN Policy Staff in support of ALAC E-mail: <mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org%3cmailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org> staff(a)atlarge.icann.org<applewebdata://68497759-1B04-4F9B-84B7-B9445B8F305F/Regards,%20Heidi%20Ullrich,%20Silvia%20Vivanco,%20Matt%20Ashtiani,%20Ariel%20Liang,%20Gisella%20Gruber,%20Nathalie%20Peregrine%20and%20Julia%20Charvolen%20ICANN%20Policy%20Staff%20in%20support%20of%20ALACmailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org> ** Dear friends, Just a reminder that there is a draft statement on the portal (https://community.icann.org/display/alacpolicydev/At-Large+Interim+Report+I…) on the IRD WG. As I am new to the group and the topic, and there is lots of gaps in the statement - would some of you be so kind to look at the statement and edit/add as appropriate please? I am just aware that the deadline is looming, and the statement is finished. Kind Regards, Raf

1 0

QUESTION: ALAC Statement on the Interim Report Internationalized Registration Data Expert Working Group
by Ariel Liang April 25, 2014

April 25, 2014

Hello Edmon, I hope your day has been going well. Rinalia has informed me that you agreed a Statement is necessary for the PC ³Interim Report Internationalized Registration Data Expert Working Group <http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/ird-interim-14apr14-en.htm> .² Would you be the penholder of the ALAC Statement? If not, who would you suggest me to contact? Please note that the comment period closes on 05 May 23:59 UTC. Thank you Edmon! Ariel Xinyue (Ariel) Liang | Washington DC At-Large Policy Coordinator Direct +1 (202) 249-7552 Mobile +1 (310) 804-2761 Email ariel.liang(a)icann.org Web www.icann.org

1 0

Follow-up: Statement Necessary? Interim Report Internationalized Registration Data Expert Working Group
by Ariel Liang April 22, 2014

April 22, 2014

Hello Rinalia and Edmon, This is to follow-up my previous question about the PC "Interim Report Internationalized Registration Data Expert Working Group <https://community.icann.org/x/2TrRAg> .² Do you think a Statement is necessary for this? Thank you, Ariel From: Ariel Liang <ariel.liang(a)icann.org> Date: Friday, April 18, 2014 at 6:32 AM To: Rinalia Abdul Rahim <rinalia.abdulrahim(a)gmail.com>, Edmon Chung <edmon(a)registry.asia> Cc: "idn-wg(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org" <idn-wg(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org>, Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond <ocl(a)gih.com> Subject: Statement Necessary? Interim Report Internationalized Registration Data Expert Working Group Hello Rinalia and Edmon, I hope your day has been going well. Please note that the At-Large workspace for the following PC has been created: Interim Report Internationalized Registration Data Expert Working Group <https://community.icann.org/x/2TrRAg> . Could you please be so kind to let me know if a Statement is necessary for this PC? Thank you, Ariel Xinyue (Ariel) Liang | Washington DC At-Large Policy Coordinator Direct +1 (202) 249-7552 Mobile +1 (310) 804-2761 Email ariel.liang(a)icann.org Web www.icann.org

1 0

Draft ALAC Statement on Maximal Starting Repertoire
by Rinalia Abdul Rahim April 19, 2014

April 19, 2014

Colleagues, A draft statement regarding the implementation of the Root Zone Label Generation Rules Project and the Maximal Starting Repertoire is pasted at the bottom of this mail and posted on the At-Large Policy Development wiki - https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=47257418# The draft is prepared based on observations as well as input gathered from language community representatives during the At-Large IDN Working Group meeting in Singapore, which was co-chaired by Edmon Chung and myself. Please comment on the wiki. Best regards, Rinalia *ALAC Statement on **IDN Variant TLDs – LGR Procedure Implementation – Maximal Starting Repertoire Version 1* The ALAC notes the progress made in the implementation of the Root Zone Label Generation Rules (LGR) Project, specifically: - Issuance of the Maximal Starting Repertoire Version 1 by the Integration Panel; - Completion of a standardized XML format to represent Label Generation Rules for the Root Zone; - Responses from Language Communities in forming script Generation Panels. We recognize that the project is crucial for ensuring that the Root Zone is able to support IDN variants, which are applicable for major languages used by the global population of Internet users. We are greatly encouraged by the success of the Arabic script community in forming a Generation Panel to address a script that is shared by many languages across Africa, North Africa, East Asia, South Asia and the Middle East. We are also heartened by indications of mobilization by the Chinese, Japanese, Korean and Indic communities towards forming their script Generation Panels. Based on our observations as well as feedback received from various language communities, we wish to highlight some issues of concern that require urgent attention in moving the project forward. *Meeting Demand for IDN TLD* The Maximal Starting Repertoire Version 1 covers 18 scripts requested by new IDN gTLD applicants. The Generation Panels already formed and in the process of being formed do not match the demand. We view the lack of response from the Cyrillic, Greek, Georgian, Hebrew, Lao, Latin and Thai communities as of the ICANN 49 meeting in Singapore to be a matter of concern. We urge ICANN to take action to address the gap. Our recommendations to the ICANN IDN Variant TLD Program Team: - Work together with the ICANN Global Stakeholder Engagement Team and reach out to the target language communities to raise their awareness about the project and encourage Generation Panel formation. - Provide a briefing to the Governmental Advisory Committee, the Country Code Top Level Domain community and regional associations as well as the At-Large Regional Organizations to seek their support in reaching out to the target communities. - Work with the ICANN Communications Team to simplify key documents related to the Root Zone Project to aid community understanding and community-initiated outreach. - As part of the community briefing kit, provide concrete examples of how Generation Panels can be formed by sharing/highlighting the successful experience of Generation Panel/s already formed. - Facilitate or enable appropriate facilitation to support the collaboration of language communities that share a script to form a Generation Panel or for communities with related scripts to resolve joint issues if a request for facilitation is received. - Leverage on the Internet Governance Forum (global and regional) to widen awareness about the project and the need for language community participation. *Feedback on Maximal Starting Repertoire Version 1* We commend the Integration Panel for producing a Maximal Starting Repertoire (MSR) in a format that is easy for language communities to understand and manage. The MSR clearly outlines the set of code points that is ineligible for the Root Zone. It also clearly outlines the set of code points that the Integration Panel has defined as possible for inclusion as well as those that should be excluded based on provided rationale. We note that the MSR will serve as a “fixed collection of code points from which Generation Panels may make a selection in constructing the repertoire for their respective LGR proposals” based on what the Integration Panel has determined to be possible for inclusion. We also note that the Integration Panel intends to “freeze” the MSR version 1 after this call for public comment. We advise against freezing script segments of the MSR without receiving sufficient input from language communities (i.e., via a script Generation Panel or from the script community in general if no Generation Panel has been established). For subsequent versions of the MSR and LGR, we support the suggestion that there be a designated release timeline (i.e., a designated time period for release of updated versions where language communities can plan their submissions as well as expect updates to be published). We also request that the Integration Panel provides confirmation that subsequent versions of the MSR may include a superset or expanded set of possible code points based on the review and input received from language communities. END

1 0

Statement Necessary? Interim Report Internationalized Registration Data Expert Working Group
by Ariel Liang April 17, 2014

April 17, 2014

Hello Rinalia and Edmon, I hope your day has been going well. Please note that the At-Large workspace for the following PC has been created: Interim Report Internationalized Registration Data Expert Working Group <https://community.icann.org/x/2TrRAg> . Could you please be so kind to let me know if a Statement is necessary for this PC? Thank you, Ariel Xinyue (Ariel) Liang | Washington DC At-Large Policy Coordinator Direct +1 (202) 249-7552 Mobile +1 (310) 804-2761 Email ariel.liang(a)icann.org Web www.icann.org

1 0