February 2021 - Latingp - lists.icann.org

Re: [Latingp] Meeting material - Decision tree for imposed variant
by Tan Tanaka, Dennis March 1, 2021

March 1, 2021

Thank you for putting this together. IMO, this case highlights the limitation of the tool. Trying to accommodate competing rules across various scripts can be a complex undertaking. I believe there is a misconception what the RZ-LGR can do or what even the DNS can do in terms of variant names at the top-level, but that’s for another time to chat about ☺ I read certain sections of the Greek GP’s proposal and it is clear to me that their criteria is not the same as that of Latin GP. So applying their rationale to ours, does not make sense. If transitivity is enforced, then so be it, but Latin GP should not agree with it. Let the IP figure out the solution for the combined LGR; it’s their job. Or am I missing something? Dennis From: Latingp <latingp-bounces(a)icann.org> on behalf of Pitinan Kooarmornpatana via Latingp <latingp(a)icann.org> Reply-To: Pitinan Kooarmornpatana <pitinan.koo(a)icann.org> Date: Thursday, February 25, 2021 at 12:54 PM To: "latingp(a)icann.org" <latingp(a)icann.org> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [Latingp] Meeting material - Decision tree for imposed variant Caution: This email originated from outside the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Dear Latin GP members, Today Mats Bill Michael have met for an informal discussion on Bill’s email and the presentation sent earlier. Please find attached the updated material (adding some example on the second page). This will be discussed again in the next meeting (4 March 2021) Regards, Pitinan From: Latingp <latingp-bounces(a)icann.org> on behalf of Pitinan Kooarmornpatana via Latingp <latingp(a)icann.org> Reply-To: Pitinan Kooarmornpatana <pitinan.koo(a)icann.org> Date: Thursday, February 25, 2021 at 10:43 PM To: "latingp(a)icann.org" <latingp(a)icann.org> Subject: [Latingp] Meeting material - Decision tree for imposed variant Dear All, We have consulted with the chair to developed a summary slide to lay out possible options of Latin GP regarding the imposed variant from other script LGR. Please find attached the slide. This is planned to be used during the meeting today. Regards, Pitinan

4 3

Re: [Latingp] Meeting material - Decision tree for imposed variant
by Pitinan Kooarmornpatana Feb. 25, 2021

Feb. 25, 2021

Dear Latin GP members, Today Mats Bill Michael have met for an informal discussion on Bill’s email and the presentation sent earlier. Please find attached the updated material (adding some example on the second page). This will be discussed again in the next meeting (4 March 2021) Regards, Pitinan From: Latingp <latingp-bounces(a)icann.org> on behalf of Pitinan Kooarmornpatana via Latingp <latingp(a)icann.org> Reply-To: Pitinan Kooarmornpatana <pitinan.koo(a)icann.org> Date: Thursday, February 25, 2021 at 10:43 PM To: "latingp(a)icann.org" <latingp(a)icann.org> Subject: [Latingp] Meeting material - Decision tree for imposed variant Dear All, We have consulted with the chair to developed a summary slide to lay out possible options of Latin GP regarding the imposed variant from other script LGR. Please find attached the slide. This is planned to be used during the meeting today. Regards, Pitinan

1 0

Greek LGR proposal version 6.3
by Pitinan Kooarmornpatana Feb. 25, 2021

Feb. 25, 2021

Dear Latin GP members, As agreed by Greek GP chair, please find attached the current version of the Greek LGR package (version6.3). This is for your information. Regards, Pitinan

2 1

I have to stay in bed today
by Mirjana Tasić Feb. 25, 2021

Feb. 25, 2021

Dear GP members, I caught some bad flue, I have to stay in bed today. Please try to organize the call without me. Otherwise, the call could be cancelled. Decide when you meet. Regards Mirjana

5 4

Meeting material - Decision tree for imposed variant
by Pitinan Kooarmornpatana Feb. 25, 2021

Feb. 25, 2021

Dear All, We have consulted with the chair to developed a summary slide to lay out possible options of Latin GP regarding the imposed variant from other script LGR. Please find attached the slide. This is planned to be used during the meeting today. Regards, Pitinan

1 0

Re: [Latingp] Presentation for icann70 - final
by Mats Dufberg Feb. 18, 2021

Feb. 18, 2021

On slide 8 there is a comment " Does this mean Public Comment or just feedback?". Is that resolved? Mats -- --- Mats Dufberg mats.dufberg(a)internetstiftelsen.se Technical Expert Internetstiftelsen (The Swedish Internet Foundation) Mobile: +46 73 065 3899 https://internetstiftelsen.se/ From: Latingp <latingp-bounces(a)icann.org> on behalf of ICANN Latin GP <latingp(a)icann.org> Reply to: Mirjana Tasić <Mirjana.Tasic(a)rnids.rs> Date: Saturday, 13 February 2021 at 22:17 To: ICANN Latin GP <latingp(a)icann.org> Subject: [Latingp] Presentation for icann70 - final Dear GP members, Please find final presentation for ICANN 70. If I made any mistakes again, please let me know. Otherwise Pitinan can use this version for Prep week. Regards Mirjana

2 1

Variants
by Bill Jouris Feb. 18, 2021

Feb. 18, 2021

Dear colleagues, There are a number of cases where both we and another Generation Panel have concluded that a pair of code points should be a cross-script variant. However, the IP indicates that it has come around to the view that it is not necessary that both GPs do so for every cross-script variant. Accordingly, I think our default position should be, essentially, Noted -- that is, we are aware that another GP has found a cross-script variant; while we did not see it, we do not object. Simply put, I do not feel that going back over all of the cross-script pairs would be a worthwhile use of our time. Now there may be some cases where we do wish to object, perhaps because it results in an in-script variant which we have a problem with. But it seems to me that should be the exception. And that the threshold for us actually pushing back should be fairly high -- something on the order of: 5 of 7 of us see a problem. My opinion is that there would be a problem if a language or languages used by a significant portion of the Latin script user population a) includes both code points, b) uses those two points to differentiate between a significant number of relatively common words Otherwise, I favor just accepting what results from transitivity and moving on. Bill Jouris Inside Products bill.jouris(a)insidethestack.com 831-659-8360 925-855-9512 (direct)

2 1

Agenda for Latin GP call on February the 18th, 2021 17:00UTC
by Mirjana Tasić Feb. 18, 2021

Feb. 18, 2021

Dear GP members, Please find enclosed the Agenda proposal for our next call. Any comments and suggestions are welcome. Regards Mirjana Agenda for Latin GP call on February the 18th, 2021 17:00UTC 1. Continue discussion about IP Review. Review received in an e-mail sent by Sarmad on December 23rd, 2020 2. Next call to be decided during this call, proposal is February the 25th , 2021 3. AOB

1 0

Presentation for icann70 - final
by Mirjana Tasić Feb. 13, 2021

Feb. 13, 2021

Dear GP members, Please find final presentation for ICANN 70. If I made any mistakes again, please let me know. Otherwise Pitinan can use this version for Prep week. Regards Mirjana

1 0

Query on Fula Lanugage
by Sarmad Hussain Feb. 12, 2021

Feb. 12, 2021

Dear Latin GP members, On the query related to variant relationship in Fula language, IP suggests looking at "Fula's Latin script" section in Wikipedia article on "Fula language". Regards, Sarmad

1 0