August 2019 - Latingp - lists.icann.org

Summary of Latin GP Meeting on 29 August 2019
by Pitinan Kooarmornpatana Aug. 29, 2019

Aug. 29, 2019

Dear Latin GP members, Please find attached the summary of the Latin GP meeting on 29 August 2019. Please let us know if you would like to suggest any edits or additions. Action Items S. No.Action ItemsOwner 1Draft the underlining analysis section in the proposal.BJ, MM This summary and the recording are also posted at the Latin Wiki Page at https://community.icann.org/display/croscomlgrprocedure/Latin+GP Regards, Pitinan

1 0

AGENDA for the GP call on August the 29th, 2019, 16:00UTC
by Mirjana Tasić Aug. 29, 2019

Aug. 29, 2019

Dear GP members. Please find enclosed the Agenda proposal for our next telephone conference. The agenda is the same as it was last five calls, only dates of calls are changed. Any comments are welcome. Pitinan will send the remainder on time. All links to relevant working documents could be found at the end of this document in the section REMINDERS. Regards Mirjana ___________________________________________ AGENDA for the GP call on August the 29th, 2019, 16:00UTC 1. Roll call 2. Discussion on Dennis contribution Appendix: IDNA Compatibility – Latin Small Letter Sharp S (ß) 00DF [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_docume…>, IDNA2003 compatibility issues slides 8/1 <https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1Pey1tE1q3KnvbKtiSjaUNsaVC_AXhwmaLgP…> 3. Finalization of the topic “Sharp s vs ss”, page 61 in the Report 4. Stacking with combining diacritics<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GKJ-NF5MnRllFiz7iaa5hsmyNpg5oxPxqBl2MNt…> - discussion 5. Next meeting proposal September the 5th, 2019, 16:00UTC 6. AOB REMINDERS 1. Latin GP – Report version 5 schedule<https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1siFPKNqSr-YGj0DKurvS3hcoa8Y8eAJUBHp…> 2. Meikal’s Template for Appendix D on Variants https://onedrive.live.com/view.aspx?resid=10C636851F7DD403!612296&ithint=fi… Panel members contributions are in Appendix D<https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/13OI1Yb9RO2Z_l4C0hbFCZ8xVONxdwqBU> 1. Apendix D Merger<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1nGIerPh21yxPHuuSyNo2uShanvFzD0MUb1ai6QV…> made by Meikal 2. Trello board with In-script analysis items<https://trello.com/c/BoKkXTzF/1-in-script-variants-analysis> 3. Bill’s table with code points collected for visual similarity analysis https://www.dropbox.com/preview/Latin%20GP/InScriptVariants/Bill-%20In-Scri… 4. Bill’s finding on Stacking with Combining Diacritics (Attachment: Combining Diacritics and Stacking.pdf) Dropbox: https://www.dropbox.com/preview/Latin%20GP/InScriptVariants/Bill-CombiningD… Google doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GKJ-NF5MnRllFiz7iaa5hsmyNpg5oxPxqBl2MNt… 1. Dennis contribution Appendix: IDNA Compatibility – Latin Small Letter Sharp S (ß) 00DF [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_docume…> 2. IDNA2003 compatibility issues slides 8/1 <https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1Pey1tE1q3KnvbKtiSjaUNsaVC_AXhwmaLgP…> produced by Dennis

3 3

Latin GP meeting
by Pitinan Kooarmornpatana Aug. 28, 2019

Aug. 28, 2019

1 0

Latin Small Letter Sharp S (ß) U+00DF
by Bill Jouris Aug. 26, 2019

Aug. 26, 2019

Dear colleagues, I had a couple of thoughts over the weekend. First, I think that in order to make progress we need to unpack our analysis a little. In particular, we need to consider each option, for both misconnection and failure of connection, separately for IDNA 2003 and for IDNA 2008. Then we will have the information in front of us to decide how much of a problem we have. For example, consider Option 2 (Sharp S and double S as blocked variants). (For this discussion, assume a TLD using the Sharp S exists. Thus the TLD which only differs by having a double S is blocked.) If the user enters a valid domain name using the Sharp S, on a browser which uses IDNA 2003, the browser converts it to double s before going to the DNS. The DNS doesn't find the name, and so the connection fails. Whereas a browser with IDNA 2008 goes to the DNS with the correct name, and the connection succeeds. Does this constitute a change of behavior? Absolutely. But is this change, "instability" if you will, a significant problem? I would suggest that it is not. To call it a significant problem is to argue that bugs should not be fixed. A bug fix, after all, necessarily results in a change of behavior; that is its whole purpose. Back-level software (which IDNA 2003 is) will always give problematic results. That's why we upgrade. Certainly an ideal solution will have no misconnection under either level of IDNA, and no failed connection when the user enters a valid domain name. But unless we find such a paragon, we will need to find the "least bad" solution. And having this additional data in front of us will help with that. Second, I want to comment on the Option for Sharp S and double S with no variant relationship. I have a question for those who are more fluent in German than I -- which is most of you. Are there any examples of two different German words which are identical except that one is rendered with a Sharp S and the other is rendered strictly with a double S? It seems to me that, unless there are, a "not variant" judgement is unsustainable and the option should be rejected out of hand. Regardless of what this analysis might find. Bill Jouris Inside Products bill.jouris(a)insidethestack.com 831-659-8360 925-855-9512 (direct)

5 6

Summary of Latin GP Meeting on 22 August 2019
by Pitinan Kooarmornpatana Aug. 23, 2019

Aug. 23, 2019

Dear Latin GP members, Please find attached the summary of the Latin GP meeting on 22 August 2019. Please let us know if you would like to suggest any edits or additions. Action Items S. No.Action ItemsOwner 1Expand the cases in the slide ‘IDNA 2003 Compatibility Issues - Sharp S’ to cover two possible cases of ‘Misconnection’. DT, MM This summary and the recording are also posted at the Latin Wiki Page at https://community.icann.org/display/croscomlgrprocedure/Latin+GP Regards, Pitinan

1 0

Re: [Latingp] AGENDA for the GP call on August the 22nd, 2019, 16:00UTC
by Tan Tanaka, Dennis Aug. 22, 2019

Aug. 22, 2019

Thanks, Mats. Will do Enjoy your vacation! -Dennis From: Latingp <latingp-bounces(a)icann.org> on behalf of Mats Dufberg <mats.dufberg(a)internetstiftelsen.se> Date: Thursday, August 22, 2019 at 9:49 AM To: Mirjana Tasić <Mirjana.Tasic(a)rnids.rs>, Latin GP <latingp(a)icann.org> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [Latingp] AGENDA for the GP call on August the 22nd, 2019, 16:00UTC Due to vacation and travel I will not be able to attend the meeting today. I sent an email to the list last Friday 2019-08-16 on my thoughts on the Sharp S issue. Please see that as my contribution to the discussion tonight. Yours, Mats --- Mats Dufberg DNS Specialist Internetstiftelsen (The Swedish Internet Foundation) Mobile: +46 73 065 3899 https://internetstiftelsen.se/ From: Latingp <latingp-bounces(a)icann.org> on behalf of Mirjana Tasić <Mirjana.Tasic(a)rnids.rs> Date: Thursday, 22 August 2019 at 00:35 To: ICANN Latin GP <latingp(a)icann.org> Subject: [Latingp] AGENDA for the GP call on August the 22nd, 2019, 16:00UTC Dear GP members. Please find enclosed the Agenda proposal for our next telephone conference. The agenda is the same as it was last few calls, only dates of calls are changed. Any comments are welcome. Pitinan will send the remainder on time. All links to relevant working documents could be found at the end of this document in the section REMINDERS. Regards Mirjana ___________________________________________ AGENDA for the GP call on August the 22nd, 2019, 16:00UTC 1. Roll call 2. Discussion on Dennis contribution Appendix: IDNA Compatibility – Latin Small Letter Sharp S (ß) 00DF [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_docume…>, IDNA2003 compatibility issues slides 8/1 <https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1Pey1tE1q3KnvbKtiSjaUNsaVC_AXhwmaLgP…> 3. Finalization of the topic “Sharp s vs ss”, page 61 in the Report 4. Stacking with combining diacritics<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GKJ-NF5MnRllFiz7iaa5hsmyNpg5oxPxqBl2MNt…> - discussion 5. Next meeting proposal August the 29th, 2019, 16:00 6. AOB REMINDERS 1. Latin GP – Report version 5 schedule<https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1siFPKNqSr-YGj0DKurvS3hcoa8Y8eAJUBHp…> 2. Meikal’s Template for Appendix D on Variants https://onedrive.live.com/view.aspx?resid=10C636851F7DD403!612296&ithint=fi… Panel members contributions are in Appendix D<https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/13OI1Yb9RO2Z_l4C0hbFCZ8xVONxdwqBU> 3. Apendix D Merger<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1nGIerPh21yxPHuuSyNo2uShanvFzD0MUb1ai6QV…> made by Meikal 4. Trello board with In-script analysis items<https://trello.com/c/BoKkXTzF/1-in-script-variants-analysis> 5. Bill’s table with code points collected for visual similarity analysis https://www.dropbox.com/preview/Latin%20GP/InScriptVariants/Bill-%20In-Scri… 6. Bill’s finding on Stacking with Combining Diacritics (Attachment: Combining Diacritics and Stacking.pdf) Dropbox: https://www.dropbox.com/preview/Latin%20GP/InScriptVariants/Bill-CombiningD… Google doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GKJ-NF5MnRllFiz7iaa5hsmyNpg5oxPxqBl2MNt… 7. Dennis contribution Appendix: IDNA Compatibility – Latin Small Letter Sharp S (ß) 00DF [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_docume…> 8. IDNA2003 compatibility issues slides 8/1 <https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1Pey1tE1q3KnvbKtiSjaUNsaVC_AXhwmaLgP…> produced by Dennis

5 10

Please start the meeting without me, I have to restart the computer
by Mirjana Tasić Aug. 22, 2019

Aug. 22, 2019

Dear all, Please start without me, my computer has mixed time zones, I have to restart it. I am asking Dennis to take a lead.

1 0

AGENDA for the GP call on August the 22nd, 2019, 16:00UTC
by Mirjana Tasić Aug. 22, 2019

Aug. 22, 2019

Dear GP members. Please find enclosed the Agenda proposal for our next telephone conference. The agenda is the same as it was last few calls, only dates of calls are changed. Any comments are welcome. Pitinan will send the remainder on time. All links to relevant working documents could be found at the end of this document in the section REMINDERS. Regards Mirjana ___________________________________________ AGENDA for the GP call on August the 22nd, 2019, 16:00UTC 1. Roll call 2. Discussion on Dennis contribution Appendix: IDNA Compatibility – Latin Small Letter Sharp S (ß) 00DF [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_docume…>, IDNA2003 compatibility issues slides 8/1 <https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1Pey1tE1q3KnvbKtiSjaUNsaVC_AXhwmaLgP…> 3. Finalization of the topic “Sharp s vs ss”, page 61 in the Report 4. Stacking with combining diacritics<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GKJ-NF5MnRllFiz7iaa5hsmyNpg5oxPxqBl2MNt…> - discussion 5. Next meeting proposal August the 29th, 2019, 16:00 6. AOB REMINDERS 1. Latin GP – Report version 5 schedule<https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1siFPKNqSr-YGj0DKurvS3hcoa8Y8eAJUBHp…> 2. Meikal’s Template for Appendix D on Variants https://onedrive.live.com/view.aspx?resid=10C636851F7DD403!612296&ithint=fi… Panel members contributions are in Appendix D<https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/13OI1Yb9RO2Z_l4C0hbFCZ8xVONxdwqBU> 1. Apendix D Merger<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1nGIerPh21yxPHuuSyNo2uShanvFzD0MUb1ai6QV…> made by Meikal 2. Trello board with In-script analysis items<https://trello.com/c/BoKkXTzF/1-in-script-variants-analysis> 3. Bill’s table with code points collected for visual similarity analysis https://www.dropbox.com/preview/Latin%20GP/InScriptVariants/Bill-%20In-Scri… 4. Bill’s finding on Stacking with Combining Diacritics (Attachment: Combining Diacritics and Stacking.pdf) Dropbox: https://www.dropbox.com/preview/Latin%20GP/InScriptVariants/Bill-CombiningD… Google doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GKJ-NF5MnRllFiz7iaa5hsmyNpg5oxPxqBl2MNt… 1. Dennis contribution Appendix: IDNA Compatibility – Latin Small Letter Sharp S (ß) 00DF [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_docume…> 2. IDNA2003 compatibility issues slides 8/1 <https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1Pey1tE1q3KnvbKtiSjaUNsaVC_AXhwmaLgP…> produced by Dennis

2 1

Latin Small Letter Sharp S (ß) U+00DF
by Mats Dufberg Aug. 16, 2019

Aug. 16, 2019

Dear all, As I see it, we have concluded that there are special issues around Sharp S and that we should find the best solution around it. We have identified four possible solutions given the restrictions given to us: 1. Excluding Sharp S from the repertoire. [NoIncl] 2. Making "ss" being a variant of Sharp S and "ss" being allocatable (variant the other way too, but maybe not allocatable). [Var1] 3. Making "ss" and Sharp S being blocked variants to each other. [Var2] 4. Including Sharp S in the repertoire with any variant rules. [NoVar] For the selection of solution, we have identified three factors that we want to find the optimal mix of: 1. The risk for misconnection, i.e. the users reach a domain name under another TLD, should be minimized. [Mis] 2. If possible, all characters used for writing a language should be available for a TLD name. That is the goal for all languages that we have selected to support. [Inc] 3. The risk for failure of service, i.e. the users is redirected to something else that does not exist, should be minimized. [FoS] If we then set some score on how well the solutions handle the factors, where 3 means handles it completely (good) and 0 not at all (bad), we get more or less the table that Michael Bauland sent a week ago (but somewhat modified here). NoIncl | Var1 | Var2 | NoVar Mis (1) 3 | 3 | 3 | 0 Inc (2) 0 | 3 | 3 | 3 FoS (3) 3 | 2 | 0 | 1 If Sharp S is excluded or included with variant rules there is no risk of misconnection (score 3). If it is included without variant rules there is risk of misconnections for users of e.g. Chrome (score 0). If Sharp S is excluded, it will not be available for TLDs for German needs (score 0). If it is included (the other solutions) it is available (score 3). Failure of Service is the most complex factor in terms of scoring. If sharp S is excluded, it is never used for TLDs and no failure of service can occur for names under TLDs with Sharp S since they do not exist (score 3). If "ss" is a blocked variant of Sharp S users of Chrome and IE will experience failure of service (score 0). If "ss" is an allocatable variant we may have no "FoS" if the variants are activated and all that (score 2). If we Sharp S available without variant rules it is still, at least theoretically, but less likely, that the same Registry Operator get both TLDs, with Sharp S and with "ss" (score 1). So my conlusion: If Sharp S is included and let "ss" be a allocatable variant of it (Var1), then the problem of misconnection is handled completely, Sharp S will be available for the language that needs it and at least it will be possible to avoid the risk of failure of service. I think this is the best mix, the best solution. * The next question we should ask is how the different solutions will work if (when) Chrome and IE/Edge support IDNA 2008 fully (IE is deprecated, Edge is the replacement). * The upcoming two weeks I will be on vacation travelling. I might attend, but probably not. Yours, Mats (I here use "include" and "exclude" instead of "defer". In our document we have used the terms "include" and "exclude". I see no reason why we should use other terminology here. There are code points in MSR that we have decided exclude - or not include - that could be included in the future. There is nothing special about Sharp S.) --- Mats Dufberg DNS Specialist Internetstiftelsen (The Swedish Internet Foundation) Mobile: +46 73 065 3899 https://internetstiftelsen.se/

1 0

Summary of Latin GP Meeting on 15 August 2019
by Pitinan Kooarmornpatana Aug. 15, 2019

Aug. 15, 2019

Dear Latin GP members, Please find attached the summary of the Latin GP meeting on 15 August 2019. Please let us know if you would like to suggest any edits or additions. Action Items S. No.Action ItemsOwner 1Continue to discuss how to complete the table “Balance Stability of the Root Zone and Inclusion of a code point” on the mailing list ALL This summary and the recording are also posted at the Latin Wiki Page at https://community.icann.org/display/croscomlgrprocedure/Latin+GP Regards, Pitinan

1 0