Hi Bill, all, Thank you for raising this concern. My perception is that Latin work is now stable and closer to finish line, so IP is now getting into detailed copyediting – something which is done before a RZ-LGR proposal publication. Beyond the edits, IP is requesting for two additions, which are largely mechanical in nature: 1. Adding cross-script and in-script variants for Latin due to the Greek variant analysis. This is especially important due to the in-script variants introduced in Latin script. 2. Adding one single complete variant table which gives the complete picture, because the currently distributed tables do not provide this information for the readers. Pitinan and I can support Latin GP do 1 and 2 (because of their mechanical nature). The copyediting based on IP feedback will need discussion from Latin GP. Kindly note that other scripts like Arabic, Chinese, Devanagari and others have gone through similar cycles. Latin script is one of the more complex cases for RZ-LGR work and so has required a significant effort. Based on the feedback from IP, my reading was that Latin GP would be done in just a few more meetings. Regards, Sarmad From: Latingp <latingp-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Latin GP <latingp@icann.org> Reply-To: "b_jouris@yahoo.com" <b_jouris@yahoo.com> Date: Monday, May 24, 2021 at 8:27 AM To: Latin GP <latingp@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Latingp] IP Interim Review of Latin-LGR-v6 D ear colleagues, I confess that I find this extremely disspiriting. And not just because it shoves our probable completion back to the end of the year. At the very least. The Latin script was always going to be the messiest one to deal with, just because of how many unrelated languages use some variation of it. And the fact that the IP members are all very familiar with it meant we would get an exceptional amount of nit-picking from them on whatever we did. But that's not what bothers me here. Reading the latest comments, I can only see two possible explanations: 1) Perhaps we are all just exceptionally stupid, compared to the members of the other GPs, and that's why we keep getting it wrong. I don't believe this, but it is a possible explanation. 2) Alternatively, perhaps the IP just keeps moving the goal posts on us. At this point, there's no way to predict when, if ever, they will cease and desist. But until and unless they do, we will never finish. Maybe I'm just depressed this evening. But that's definitely my initial reaction to reading their latest feedback. Bill Jouris Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android [go.onelink.me]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/go.onelink.me/107872968?pid=InProduct&c=G...> On Sat, May 22, 2021 at 5:09 AM, Sarmad Hussain via Latingp <latingp@icann.org> wrote: 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 _______________________________________________ Latingp mailing list Latingp@icann.org<mailto:Latingp@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/latingp _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.