But the thing is, I believe that this particular case IS within our scope. Bill Jouris Inside Products bill.jouris@insidethestack.com 831-659-8360 925-855-9512 (direct) From: "Tan Tanaka, Dennis" <dtantanaka@verisign.com> To: Michael Bauland <Michael.Bauland@knipp.de> Cc: Bill Jouris <bill.jouris@insidethestack.com>; Mirjana Tasić <Mirjana.Tasic@rnids.rs>; "latingp@icann.org" <latingp@icann.org> Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2018 4:45 AM Subject: Re: [Latingp] ODG: ODG: Variants -- Case for Considering Upper Case I concur. Let’s focus on completing the task within our scope. Visually similarity is dealt by the String Similarity Review process. Dennis Sent from my iPhone
On Jul 10, 2018, at 4:59 AM, Michael Bauland <Michael.Bauland@knipp.de> wrote:
Hi Bill,
On 09.07.2018 19:11, Bill Jouris wrote: For example, suppose we decide that a Cyrillic Small Letter Em (м codepoint 043C) is NOT a variant of a Latin Small Letter M (m codepoint 006D). Then it is possible to create a (Cyrillic) TLD of .сом, because the last letter is visibly "different" from that in .com.
as said earlier, I agree that having a TLD сом is definitely a problem and should not be allowed. But independent from our variant rules, such a TLD application would always be rejected.
Therefore I agree with Mirjana: let's first concentrate on the task we have to do and then later we can look at further work that is nice to have.
Cheers,
Michael
-- ____________________________________________________________________ | | | knipp | Knipp Medien und Kommunikation GmbH ------- Technologiepark Martin-Schmeisser-Weg 9 44227 Dortmund Germany
Dipl.-Informatiker Fon: +49 231 9703-0 Fax: +49 231 9703-200 Dr. Michael Bauland SIP: Michael.Bauland@knipp.de Software Development E-mail: Michael.Bauland@knipp.de
Register Court: Amtsgericht Dortmund, HRB 13728
Chief Executive Officers: Dietmar Knipp, Elmar Knipp _______________________________________________ Latingp mailing list Latingp@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/latingp