Briefly, these meet the definition in Procedure to Develop and Maintain the Label Generation Rules for the Root Zone in Respect of IDNA Labels:
An IDN variant, as understood here, is an alternate code point (or sequence of code points) that could be substituted for a code point (or sequence of code points) in a candidate label to create a variant label that is considered the “same” in some measure by a given community of Internet users.
Bill Jouris
Inside Products
bill.jouris@insidethestack.com
831-659-8360
925-855-9512 (direct)
From: "Tan Tanaka, Dennis" <dtantanaka@verisign.com>
To: "bill.jouris@insidethestack.com" <bill.jouris@insidethestack.com>; "latingp@icann.org" <latingp@icann.org>
Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2018 12:23 PM
Subject: Re: [Latingp] Draft in-script variants
Interesting point of view re:Marshallese . Let’s bring it up when we get to review in-script variants. For the time being please provide evidence of your candidates.
Thanks,
Dennis
From:
Bill Jouris <bill.jouris@insidethestack.com>
Reply-To: Bill Jouris <bill.jouris@insidethestack.com>
Date: Thursday, August 23, 2018 at 3:05 PM
To: Dennis Tan Tanaka <dtantanaka@verisign.com>, "latingp@icann.org" <latingp@icann.org>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [Latingp] Draft in-script variants
As far as I can see, all of the Marshallese references are to justify exclusion. Not inclusion. What am I missing?
Bill Jouris
Inside Products
bill.jouris@insidethestack.com
831-659-8360
925-855-9512 (direct)
From: "Tan Tanaka, Dennis" <dtantanaka@verisign.com>
To: "bill.jouris@insidethestack.com" <bill.jouris@insidethestack.com>; "latingp@icann.org" <latingp@icann.org>
Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2018 11:13 AM
Subject: Re: [Latingp] Draft in-script variants
For in-script variants IP asked we provide evidence of the variant relationship. Since the cases you are proposing do not
fall in the homoglyph category, the panel must provide a strong reason for inclusion (e.g. Marshelle cases)
From:
Latingp <latingp-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Bill Jouris <bill.jouris@insidethestack.com>
Reply-To: Bill Jouris <bill.jouris@insidethestack.com>
Date: Wednesday, August 22, 2018 at 11:54 PM
To: "latingp@icann.org" <latingp@icann.org>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [Latingp] Draft in-script variants
I've taken the liberty of adding a couple dozen additional candidates. (I held off the Rating 2 cases. These are the slam dunks.)
I still think that, as discussed last week, we ought to include more cases rather than fewer. Especially when we are sending
a draft to the IP for review -- that's when they can tell us if we have taken a wrong turn.
Bill Jouris
Inside Products
bill.jouris@insidethestack.com
831-659-8360
925-855-9512 (direct)
From: "Tan Tanaka, Dennis via Latingp"
<latingp@icann.org>
To: "latingp@icann.org" <latingp@icann.org>
Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2018 7:43 PM
Subject: [Latingp] Draft in-script variants
Here is the compilation of current in-script variant candidates for our review during tomorrow’s call.