May 2021 - Latingp - lists.icann.org

ACTION NEEDED: Re: IP Interim Review of Latin-LGR-v6
by Mirjana Tasić June 2, 2021

June 2, 2021

Dear Latin GP members As Sarmad mentioned, Pitinan and Sarmad can prepare the red-line version of the document based on the IP feedback, addressing all the opening issues. Once the red-line version is ready, the Latin GP can then review the redline version. I want to hear your opinion about this. Pitinan and Sarmad need some time to prepare the document, so I think you should give your opinion ASAP, no later than the end of this week. I am spending next three weeks working on my physical rehabilitation after COVID in one spa in Serbia. I hope my health will improve, so I could chair our next call. Otherwise I shall ask Bill to chair the call. Regards Mirjana From: Latin GP <latingp-bounces(a)icann.org> on behalf of Latin GP <latingp(a)icann.org> Reply to: Sarmad Hussain <sarmad.hussain(a)icann.org> Date: Saturday, 22 May 2021 at 14:09 To: Latin GP <latingp(a)icann.org> Subject: [Latingp] IP Interim Review of Latin-LGR-v6 Dear Latin GP members, Please find attached the zip file which contains Latin LGR marked with IP feedback. They have also included a short summary of changes they request to address as a separate document in the zip file. Kindly note that they request the following changes/additions: 1. Update variants sets based on the Greek LGR, because now the Greek LGR is available. IP considers it important to include in the proposal especially because it creates many in-script variants for Latin script. Also, this detail is important for readers to see in the Latin LGR proposal when it is released for public comment. Please note that earlier Chinese, Japanese and Korean script LGRs have also accommodated such cross-script impacts. 2. Capture the complete set of variants in a single additional table so that readers can see the complete picture of (in-script and cross-script) variants along with variants caused by transitivity. 3. Update text as indicated in comments of the documents (especially adjusting text where it appears to diverge from IDNA2008 requirements – they consider this as a show-stopper). Kindly also note that, in the interest of time, IP had finalized this review before the Latin GP shared its summary of changes with IP. IP has taken note of the summary and will use it for further analysis of the next version. Here is a note from Asmus further explaining the review done by the IP. ============ Dear Colleagues, Please find attached an "incomplete" review of the Latin LGR Proposal. Let me explain: we are calling it "incomplete" because, in the interest of time, we have not done certain steps that we normally perform and have postponed them to the planned review for the next draft. One of these steps consists of a mechanical verification by doing a tentative integration. Unfortunately, with the Latin and Greek drafts being so far apart, this verification has not been possible. That also means, we were unable to verify many other aspects normally checked by our verification tools. Another one of these steps would normally have consisted of a comparison between our previous feedback and the work done by the GP in the interim. That's how we usually note the progress made by a Generation Panel. This release in particular proved very challenging for us in this regard, because the changes to some of the files were substantial without either redlining or the ability to generate a mechanical diff (due to extensive changes). We decided instead to focus on any issues that we could identify quickly by direct reading of the latest text without reference to the previous version. We are hoping that this will allow you to address these remaining issues while also dealing with your reaction to the Greek Proposal draft now available. You may be curious as to the IP's position on "how close" the Latin LGR is to being ready for public comment. I can only give you my personal opinion due to the rather substantial outstanding work related to Greek. All the other items that we have identified as "critical issues" are in and of themselves showstoppers, but at the same time, they all would seem to be readily addressable, leaving as one remaining piece of substantial effort dealing with the imposed variants from Greek accented vowels. From a superficial reading it looks like the Latin LGR is set to explicitly list all the imposed variants (except for the missing Greek ones). From our perspective, that is the preferred outcome. ICANN staff should be able to assist you in preparing the XML file as they are familiar with what we would expect. We are looking forward to your next draft and anticipate that it will allow us to once again do a mechanical verification pass on the Latin LGR. With a bit of luck, and absent any other showstoppers, there's good chance that the next draft will rapidly close the remaining distance to being ready for Public Comment. Keep up the good work, A./ ========== Please let us know if you have any queries. Regards, Sarmad

5 5

Greek LGR version 6.4 dated 18 May 2021
by Pitinan Kooarmornpatana May 27, 2021

May 27, 2021

Dear Latin GP members, As the IP feedback referred to the Greek LGR, and as agreed by the Greek GP, please find attached the latest Greek LGR proposal (version 6.4 dated 18 May 2021) for your information. List of attachments: 1. Proposal for Greek Script Root Zone Label Generation Rules-v6.4-18may21.docx 2. Proposal for Greek Script Root Zone Label Generation Rules-v6.4-18may21.pdf 3. proposal-greek-lgr-18may21-en-updated.xml 4. proposal-greek-lgr-18may21-en-updated.html 5. greek-test-labels-18may21-en.txt Regards, Pitinan

1 0

Canceled: Latin GP meeting
by Pitinan Kooarmornpatana May 27, 2021

May 27, 2021

Dear Latin GP members, This is being cancelled. Regards, Pitinan

1 0

IP Interim Review of Latin-LGR-v6
by Sarmad Hussain May 24, 2021

May 24, 2021

Dear Latin GP members, Please find attached the zip file which contains Latin LGR marked with IP feedback. They have also included a short summary of changes they request to address as a separate document in the zip file. Kindly note that they request the following changes/additions: 1. Update variants sets based on the Greek LGR, because now the Greek LGR is available. IP considers it important to include in the proposal especially because it creates many in-script variants for Latin script. Also, this detail is important for readers to see in the Latin LGR proposal when it is released for public comment. Please note that earlier Chinese, Japanese and Korean script LGRs have also accommodated such cross-script impacts. 2. Capture the complete set of variants in a single additional table so that readers can see the complete picture of (in-script and cross-script) variants along with variants caused by transitivity. 3. Update text as indicated in comments of the documents (especially adjusting text where it appears to diverge from IDNA2008 requirements – they consider this as a show-stopper). Kindly also note that, in the interest of time, IP had finalized this review before the Latin GP shared its summary of changes with IP. IP has taken note of the summary and will use it for further analysis of the next version. Here is a note from Asmus further explaining the review done by the IP. ============ Dear Colleagues, Please find attached an "incomplete" review of the Latin LGR Proposal. Let me explain: we are calling it "incomplete" because, in the interest of time, we have not done certain steps that we normally perform and have postponed them to the planned review for the next draft. One of these steps consists of a mechanical verification by doing a tentative integration. Unfortunately, with the Latin and Greek drafts being so far apart, this verification has not been possible. That also means, we were unable to verify many other aspects normally checked by our verification tools. Another one of these steps would normally have consisted of a comparison between our previous feedback and the work done by the GP in the interim. That's how we usually note the progress made by a Generation Panel. This release in particular proved very challenging for us in this regard, because the changes to some of the files were substantial without either redlining or the ability to generate a mechanical diff (due to extensive changes). We decided instead to focus on any issues that we could identify quickly by direct reading of the latest text without reference to the previous version. We are hoping that this will allow you to address these remaining issues while also dealing with your reaction to the Greek Proposal draft now available. You may be curious as to the IP's position on "how close" the Latin LGR is to being ready for public comment. I can only give you my personal opinion due to the rather substantial outstanding work related to Greek. All the other items that we have identified as "critical issues" are in and of themselves showstoppers, but at the same time, they all would seem to be readily addressable, leaving as one remaining piece of substantial effort dealing with the imposed variants from Greek accented vowels. From a superficial reading it looks like the Latin LGR is set to explicitly list all the imposed variants (except for the missing Greek ones). From our perspective, that is the preferred outcome. ICANN staff should be able to assist you in preparing the XML file as they are familiar with what we would expect. We are looking forward to your next draft and anticipate that it will allow us to once again do a mechanical verification pass on the Latin LGR. With a bit of luck, and absent any other showstoppers, there's good chance that the next draft will rapidly close the remaining distance to being ready for Public Comment. Keep up the good work, A./ ========== Please let us know if you have any queries. Regards, Sarmad

2 2

ACTION NEEDED: Full response to IP
by Mirjana Tasić May 21, 2021

May 21, 2021

Dear GP members, I think that the response prepared by Pitinan is OK. She is waiting for your opinion. Regards Mirjana From: Pitinan Kooarmornpatana <pitinan.koo(a)icann.org> Date: Wednesday, 19 May 2021 at 22:11 To: Mirjana Tasić <Mirjana.Tasic(a)rnids.rs>, Latin GP <latingp(a)icann.org> Subject: Re: [Latingp] Four members think similar Dear Mirjana, and all, Please find the updated draft below. Kindly let us know if you have any feedback. We are planning to share the message and the attachments with the IP on Thursday 20 May. Regards, Pitinan ////// Dear IP members, 1. The Latin GP thanks the IP for feedback. The Latin GP has considered IP feedback and incorporate most of the items. 2. There are 3 items the GP decided to retain its position: * The consideration of O with horn and Greek sigma remains as variant code points. The GP understands that the Final sigma will also be included in the set via transitivity. * The consideration of U+0272 ɲ as a variant spelling of U+00F1 ñ in Fula language has been discussed. However, the GP could not confirm its usage and therefore these remain not variant code points. * The GP appreciates the proposed mechanism to limit imposed in-script variants in Latin by other scripts. However as it could create inconsistent experience to the users, the Latin GP decided not to implement the proposed mechanism. 3. In additional to feedback incorporated, following changes have been made in version 6. * Adding 4 more code points to the repertoire from two languages (Serer, Kpelle). These code point have been included in the variant analysis as well as per the excel file attached. i. 0260 ɠ LATIN SMALL LETTER G WITH HOOK Kpelle ii. 0188 ƈ LATIN SMALL LETTER C WITH HOOK Serer iii. 01A5 ƥ LATIN SMALL LETTER P WITH HOOK Serer iv. 01AD ƭ LATIN SMALL LETTER T WITH HOOK Serer * With point #2.a: i. Two references added for Serer and Kpelle language in the main document ii. Appendix B was updated with additional languages. iii. Appendix C was updated with additional code points. * Move the Variants Pairs Due to Transitivity to be section 6.5 * Adding variant mapping for Latin Small Letter S (0073) and Malayalam Letter Tta (0D1F) * With point #2.5: i. The code point sequence 0D1F 0D1F also added in the set of double S ii. Appendix D.7 Generic Glyphs was updated, Adding 0D1F to S-Shape set. * Other editorial changes. 1. The red-line version from version 6 and version 5 of the main document is provided (proposal-latin-lgr-29apr21-v6-redline.docx) as attached. Regards, Mirjana Tasić Latin GP chair From: Latingp <latingp-bounces(a)icann.org> on behalf of Mirjana Tasić via Latingp <latingp(a)icann.org> Reply-To: Mirjana Tasić <Mirjana.Tasic(a)rnids.rs> Date: Wednesday, May 19, 2021 at 10:57 PM To: Latin GP <latingp(a)icann.org> Subject: [Latingp] Four members think similar Dear Pitinan, At least four Latin GP members think that our response to IP should include our discussion and decision about suggestions made by IP which are not included in last version of the Report. Please try to include our decisions on these suggestions also in the response to first IP Feedback. Regards Mirjana

4 3

Re: [Latingp] [Ext] Re: Early feedback from IP
by Sarmad Hussain May 20, 2021

May 20, 2021

Sure Mirjana, We can develop a draft for Latin GP to review. Comparing document versions may not work as some sections were re-structured. However, we will try to document all the changes from the previous version submitted to the IP. Regards, Sarmad From: Mirjana Tasić <Mirjana.Tasic(a)rnids.rs> Date: Tuesday, May 11, 2021 at 9:39 PM To: Sarmad Hussain <sarmad.hussain(a)icann.org>, Latin GP <latingp(a)icann.org> Subject: [Ext] Re: [Latingp] Early feedback from IP Dear Sarmad, Is it possible that Pitinan provide such document. One possibility is to compare two documents and find differences. After that we can add rationale. I shall not be available next Thursday for a meeting, I’ll be travelling. Regards Mirjana From: Latin GP <latingp-bounces(a)icann.org> on behalf of Latin GP <latingp(a)icann.org> Reply to: Sarmad Hussain <sarmad.hussain(a)icann.org> Date: Tuesday, 11 May 2021 at 18:34 To: Latin GP <latingp(a)icann.org> Subject: [Latingp] Early feedback from IP Dear Latin GP members, Here is a request for IP. Before doing a more detailed review, the Integration Panel would like to receive a list of changes and their rationale from the previous version of the Latin LGR. As the Latin LGR proposal does not have redline changes, developing a short document for identifying recent changes will help IP review the Latin GP proposal more effectively. Regards, Sarmad

8 7

Canceled: Latin GP meeting
by Pitinan Kooarmornpatana May 20, 2021

May 20, 2021

Dear Latin GP members, The meeting today is being cancelled. Regards, Pitinan

1 0

Re: [Latingp] Four members think similar
by Pitinan Kooarmornpatana May 19, 2021

May 19, 2021

Dear Mirjana, and all, Please find the updated draft below. Kindly let us know if you have any feedback. We are planning to share the message and the attachments with the IP on Thursday 20 May. Regards, Pitinan ////// Dear IP members, 1. The Latin GP thanks the IP for feedback. The Latin GP has considered IP feedback and incorporate most of the items. 2. There are 3 items the GP decided to retain its position: * The consideration of O with horn and Greek sigma remains as variant code points. The GP understands that the Final sigma will also be included in the set via transitivity. * The consideration of U+0272 ɲ as a variant spelling of U+00F1 ñ in Fula language has been discussed. However, the GP could not confirm its usage and therefore these remain not variant code points. * The GP appreciates the proposed mechanism to limit imposed in-script variants in Latin by other scripts. However as it could create inconsistent experience to the users, the Latin GP decided not to implement the proposed mechanism. 3. In additional to feedback incorporated, following changes have been made in version 6. * Adding 4 more code points to the repertoire from two languages (Serer, Kpelle). These code point have been included in the variant analysis as well as per the excel file attached. i. 0260 ɠ LATIN SMALL LETTER G WITH HOOK Kpelle ii. 0188 ƈ LATIN SMALL LETTER C WITH HOOK Serer iii. 01A5 ƥ LATIN SMALL LETTER P WITH HOOK Serer iv. 01AD ƭ LATIN SMALL LETTER T WITH HOOK Serer * With point #2.a: i. Two references added for Serer and Kpelle language in the main document ii. Appendix B was updated with additional languages. iii. Appendix C was updated with additional code points. * Move the Variants Pairs Due to Transitivity to be section 6.5 * Adding variant mapping for Latin Small Letter S (0073) and Malayalam Letter Tta (0D1F) * With point #2.5: i. The code point sequence 0D1F 0D1F also added in the set of double S ii. Appendix D.7 Generic Glyphs was updated, Adding 0D1F to S-Shape set. * Other editorial changes. 1. The red-line version from version 6 and version 5 of the main document is provided (proposal-latin-lgr-29apr21-v6-redline.docx) as attached. Regards, Mirjana Tasić Latin GP chair From: Latingp <latingp-bounces(a)icann.org> on behalf of Mirjana Tasić via Latingp <latingp(a)icann.org> Reply-To: Mirjana Tasić <Mirjana.Tasic(a)rnids.rs> Date: Wednesday, May 19, 2021 at 10:57 PM To: Latin GP <latingp(a)icann.org> Subject: [Latingp] Four members think similar Dear Pitinan, At least four Latin GP members think that our response to IP should include our discussion and decision about suggestions made by IP which are not included in last version of the Report. Please try to include our decisions on these suggestions also in the response to first IP Feedback. Regards Mirjana

1 0

Four members think similar
by Mirjana Tasić May 19, 2021

May 19, 2021

Dear Pitinan, At least four Latin GP members think that our response to IP should include our discussion and decision about suggestions made by IP which are not included in last version of the Report. Please try to include our decisions on these suggestions also in the response to first IP Feedback. Regards Mirjana

1 0

ACTON NEEDED: Early feedback from IP
by Mirjana Tasić May 19, 2021

May 19, 2021

Dear GP members, Please give your opinion about our response to IP request. 1. IP requested that we provide following information: "Before doing a more detailed review, the Integration Panel would like to receive a list of changes and their rationale from the previous version of the Latin LGR." 2. Pitinan provided the following text: Adding 4 more code points to the repertoire from two languages (Serer, Kpelle) 0260 ɠ LATIN SMALL LETTER G WITH HOOK Kpelle 0188 ƈ LATIN SMALL LETTER C WITH HOOK Serer 01A5 ƥ LATIN SMALL LETTER P WITH HOOK Serer 01AD ƭ LATIN SMALL LETTER T WITH HOOK Serer With point #1: Two references added for Serer and Kpelle language in the main document Appendix B was updated with additional languages. Appendix C was updated with additional code points. Move the Variants Pairs Due to Transitivity to be section 6.5 Adding variant mapping for Latin Small Letter S (0073) and Malayalam Letter Tta (0D1F) With point #5: The code point sequence 0D1F 0D1F also added in the set of double S Appendix D.7 Generic Glyphs was updated, Adding 0D1F to S-Shape set. Other editorial changes. In addition, the GP has conducted the additional variant set based on the additional code points and the Malayalam Letter Tta. The analysis table has not been included in the version 6 yet. It might be useful to also share the analysis detail to the IP along with this message. Please find attached the sheet (Additional Variant Candidates.xlsx)." 3. Bill proposed and Denis and Michael agreed that we should submit additional material which consists of Michael: "I think there have been a few comments from the IP, where we decided not to follow their preferred suggestion. If we still have those decisions written down somewhere, we should add it to our report to the IP. This avoids confusion where IP could think we overlooked/ignored their comments while we actually did consider them and spent time discussing them, just in the end decided to not change anything." 4. Do you agree that response to IP should contain our decisions about their suggestions that we did not incorporate in the Report? Please respond till the end of this week. I am travelling tomorrow, so I cannot chair tomorrow meeting. Regards Mirjana

1 0