here is some suggested updates on text: Recommendation 7: All such code point listings will be placed in the IANA Repository for IDN TLD Practices Label Generation Ruleset (RFC 7940) format together with any rules applied to the registration of names containing those code points, before any such registration may be accepted. Registries with legacy IDN tables are encouraged to transition to the LGR format. Registries are encouraged to publish and/or maintain other user-friendly formats such as in tabular form or searchable form as well. On a separate note, I will have to leave the call early today around 1230 UTC. Apologies ahead of time. Edmon From: idngwg-bounces@icann.org [mailto:idngwg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Sarmad Hussain Sent: Thursday, 8 September 2016 09:27 AM To: idngwg@icann.org Subject: Re: [Idngwg] meeting notes from 25 August 2016 Dear All, Kindly find the updated version of the document incorporating input from Dennis and Mats for discussion during our meeting this Thursday 8 Sept. Regards, Sarmad From: Mats Dufberg [mailto:mats.dufberg@iis.se] Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2016 11:56 AM To: idngwg@icann.org <mailto:idngwg@icann.org> Cc: Sarmad Hussain <sarmad.hussain@icann.org <mailto:sarmad.hussain@icann.org> > Subject: Re: [Idngwg] meeting notes from 25 August 2016 This my suggestion for action item 1 below: "TLD registries offering registration of IDNs with the same language tag are encourage to cooperate on the contribution to the development and update of the second level reference IDN tables with the goal of minimizing the difference between the reference table of that language and the implemented tables for the same language." The text would fit under " 2.4 Consistency of IDN Tables" * Action item 3: I do not think that we should require that a registry should publish documentation including references to linguistic and orthographic sources etc. It could be useful for the community of the registries publish the purpose of an IDN table, e.g. for what language, languages or country it is meant. Many ccTLDs base their tables not on a single language but rather on the languages spoken in its country. It is, however, much more important that the users and stakeholders can compare the IDN tables for different TLDs. That we can achieve if we require that all TLDs use the LGR format of the IDN table as the authoritative source of that table. Mats --- Mats Dufberg DNS Specialist, IIS Mobile: +46 73 065 3899 https://www.iis.se/en/ From: <idngwg-bounces@icann.org <mailto:idngwg-bounces@icann.org> > on behalf of Sarmad Hussain <sarmad.hussain@icann.org <mailto:sarmad.hussain@icann.org> > Date: Saturday 3 September 2016 at 04:12 To: idngwg <idngwg@icann.org <mailto:idngwg@icann.org> > Subject: [Idngwg] meeting notes from 25 August 2016 Dear All, Please find attached the summary of our meeting on 25 August 2016. Please let me know in case of any changes. We have the following action items: S. No. Action Items Owner 1 Add a recommendation to encourage registries to collaborate to develop and update the reference second level LGRs MD 2 Edit last part of the Revised new recommendation re: LGRs to remove reference to PDT and RSEP to make it more generally applicable to all TLDs and add pointer to justification in the context of security and stability considerations (also define security and stability). DT 3 Review text of current recommendation 6 in Section 2.9 for finalization. Any suggestions for edits should be shared on the list. ALL 4 Revise the text in Recommendation 7 in Section 2.3 to use the LGR format, while considering the issues in such transition from the IDN Tables. EC The attached notes and the recording of the meeting are available at the IDNGWG wiki page at https://community.icann.org/display/IDN/IDN+Implementation+Guidelines. Next meeting will be on 8 September, 11am UTC. Regards, Sarmad