Re: [Latingp] Agenda for Latin GP meeting on 2 July 2020 16:00UTC
Thanks Pitinan. A few edits to consider: 1. Slide 2: instead of using “person” it should be “registry operator”, as we are referring to variant TLD labels. 2. There should be a slide explaining the issue that prompts the question about variant relationship. 3. Slide 6, between first and second bullets there should be one bullet with the question “if dotless I is included in the LGR, is a variant relationship with letter I warranted?, why?” Dennis From: Latingp <latingp-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Pitinan Kooarmornpatana <pitinan.koo@icann.org> Date: Wednesday, July 1, 2020 at 8:26 AM To: Latin GP <latingp@icann.org>, Cengiz Acarturk <acarturk@metu.edu.tr>, Cengiz Acarturk <acarturk@gmail.com>, "K. Erdogan" <kadir.erdogan@metunic.com.tr> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [Latingp] Agenda for Latin GP meeting on 2 July 2020 16:00UTC Dear Latin GP members, Please find attached the revised version of the I and dotless I discussion material. We could you this in the call tomorrow. This is for your consideration and for any feedback. Regards, Pitinan From: Latingp <latingp-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Pitinan Kooarmornpatana <pitinan.koo@icann.org> Date: Wednesday, July 1, 2020 at 02:13 To: Latin GP <latingp@icann.org>, Cengiz Acarturk <acarturk@metu.edu.tr>, Cengiz Acarturk <acarturk@gmail.com>, "K. Erdogan" <kadir.erdogan@metunic.com.tr> Subject: [Latingp] Agenda for Latin GP meeting on 2 July 2020 16:00UTC Dear Latin GP members, May I propose the agenda for the Latin GP call on 2 July 2020 to continue the discussion about dotless I and I with expert from Turkish. Just to briefly recap on variant and disposition concept for Cengiz and Kadir, I have developed a short presentation as attached. Kindly review for your consideration. This could be used during the discussion on Thursday. If you have any further queries, kindly let us know. Best Regard Pitinan
Thank you, Dennis and Cengiz for your input. Dear All, Please find attached the slide version 4. In this version, Cengiz has provided additional example in purple (see page 6) and Dennis comments has been incorporated. Talk to you soon. Regards, Pitinan From: "Tan Tanaka, Dennis" <dtantanaka@verisign.com> Date: Thursday, July 2, 2020 at 01:36 To: Pitinan Kooarmornpatana <pitinan.koo@icann.org>, "latingp@icann.org" <latingp@icann.org>, "acarturk@metu.edu.tr" <acarturk@metu.edu.tr>, "acarturk@gmail.com" <acarturk@gmail.com>, "kadir.erdogan@metunic.com.tr" <kadir.erdogan@metunic.com.tr> Subject: [Ext] Re: Re: [Latingp] Agenda for Latin GP meeting on 2 July 2020 16:00UTC Thanks Pitinan. A few edits to consider: Slide 2: instead of using “person” it should be “registry operator”, as we are referring to variant TLD labels. There should be a slide explaining the issue that prompts the question about variant relationship. Slide 6, between first and second bullets there should be one bullet with the question “if dotless I is included in the LGR, is a variant relationship with letter I warranted?, why?” Dennis From: Latingp <latingp-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Pitinan Kooarmornpatana <pitinan.koo@icann.org> Date: Wednesday, July 1, 2020 at 8:26 AM To: Latin GP <latingp@icann.org>, Cengiz Acarturk <acarturk@metu.edu.tr>, Cengiz Acarturk <acarturk@gmail.com>, "K. Erdogan" <kadir.erdogan@metunic.com.tr> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [Latingp] Agenda for Latin GP meeting on 2 July 2020 16:00UTC Dear Latin GP members, Please find attached the revised version of the I and dotless I discussion material. We could you this in the call tomorrow. This is for your consideration and for any feedback. Regards, Pitinan From: Latingp <latingp-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Pitinan Kooarmornpatana <pitinan.koo@icann.org> Date: Wednesday, July 1, 2020 at 02:13 To: Latin GP <latingp@icann.org>, Cengiz Acarturk <acarturk@metu.edu.tr>, Cengiz Acarturk <acarturk@gmail.com>, "K. Erdogan" <kadir.erdogan@metunic.com.tr> Subject: [Latingp] Agenda for Latin GP meeting on 2 July 2020 16:00UTC Dear Latin GP members, May I propose the agenda for the Latin GP call on 2 July 2020 to continue the discussion about dotless I and I with expert from Turkish. Just to briefly recap on variant and disposition concept for Cengiz and Kadir, I have developed a short presentation as attached. Kindly review for your consideration. This could be used during the discussion on Thursday. If you have any further queries, kindly let us know. Best Regard Pitinan
Hi all, I have some suggestion (sorry for being rather late): On slide 2 it says: "When someone applies for a TLD using any of these codepoints, variant TLD will be generated. Variant labels are recommended to be either assigned to the same registry operator or blocked. " To me it sounds as if the variant TLD always exists ("will be generated"). Also it's not restricted to a single variant. Maybe we could rephrase it to: "When someone applies for a TLD using any of these codepoints, all possible variant labels will be generated. These Variant labels are recommended to be either assigned to the same registry operator or blocked. " On slide 4 I think the "If" in the assumption should be removed. On Slide 5, Case 3: I don't know, whether it's important, but we could change it to make clear, the allocation does not have to be done directly. Maybe something like: "The TLD dış is registered and the TLD diş is possible to be allocated only to the same applicant, based on the policy, directly or any later time." On Slide 8 I would add an "only" to Case B, otherwise it sounds (to me) just as one of several options, it could also be assigned to another applicant (which is not the case): "Both dış or diş can be added to the root zone but could only be assigned to the same TLD applicant. " Thank you for all the work Pitinan. I think the presentation will be really helpful in today's discussion. Cheers, Michael -- ____________________________________________________________________ | | | knipp | Knipp Medien und Kommunikation GmbH ------- Technologiepark Martin-Schmeißer-Weg 9 44227 Dortmund Deutschland Dipl.-Informatiker Tel: +49 231 9703-0 Fax: +49 231 9703-200 Dr. Michael Bauland SIP: Michael.Bauland@knipp.de Software-Entwicklung E-Mail: Michael.Bauland@knipp.de Registereintrag: Amtsgericht Dortmund, HRB 13728 Geschäftsführer: Dietmar Knipp, Elmar Knipp
Thank you, Micheal, your feedback is just in time. Dear All, Please find attached the updated version (v5) of the presentation incorporating Michael's input. Thank you all reviewers for comments. Talk to you soon. Regards, Pitinan -----Original Message----- From: Michael Bauland <Michael.Bauland@knipp.de> Date: Thursday, July 2, 2020 at 13:08 To: Pitinan Kooarmornpatana <pitinan.koo@icann.org>, "Tan Tanaka, Dennis" <dtantanaka@verisign.com>, "latingp@icann.org" <latingp@icann.org>, "acarturk@metu.edu.tr" <acarturk@metu.edu.tr>, "acarturk@gmail.com" <acarturk@gmail.com>, "kadir.erdogan@metunic.com.tr" <kadir.erdogan@metunic.com.tr> Subject: Re: [Latingp] [Ext] Re: Re: Agenda for Latin GP meeting on 2 July 2020 16:00UTC Hi all, I have some suggestion (sorry for being rather late): On slide 2 it says: "When someone applies for a TLD using any of these codepoints, variant TLD will be generated. Variant labels are recommended to be either assigned to the same registry operator or blocked. " To me it sounds as if the variant TLD always exists ("will be generated"). Also it's not restricted to a single variant. Maybe we could rephrase it to: "When someone applies for a TLD using any of these codepoints, all possible variant labels will be generated. These Variant labels are recommended to be either assigned to the same registry operator or blocked. " On slide 4 I think the "If" in the assumption should be removed. On Slide 5, Case 3: I don't know, whether it's important, but we could change it to make clear, the allocation does not have to be done directly. Maybe something like: "The TLD dış is registered and the TLD diş is possible to be allocated only to the same applicant, based on the policy, directly or any later time." On Slide 8 I would add an "only" to Case B, otherwise it sounds (to me) just as one of several options, it could also be assigned to another applicant (which is not the case): "Both dış or diş can be added to the root zone but could only be assigned to the same TLD applicant. " Thank you for all the work Pitinan. I think the presentation will be really helpful in today's discussion. Cheers, Michael -- ____________________________________________________________________ | | | knipp | Knipp Medien und Kommunikation GmbH ------- Technologiepark Martin-Schmeißer-Weg 9 44227 Dortmund Deutschland Dipl.-Informatiker Tel: +49 231 9703-0 Fax: +49 231 9703-200 Dr. Michael Bauland SIP: Michael.Bauland@knipp.de Software-Entwicklung E-Mail: Michael.Bauland@knipp.de Registereintrag: Amtsgericht Dortmund, HRB 13728 Geschäftsführer: Dietmar Knipp, Elmar Knipp
Pitinan, Nice slides! Comments on v5 slides. Slid 3: "Output UTF" --> "Output Unicode code points" "LDH label" --> "LDH label or A-label" Slide 5: "owned by different applicants" --> "contracted by different Registry Operators" In the second and third picture, what does the orange woman represent? Slide 6: What is "case 1"? Slide 7: Just a detail, we could have allocatable one way (e.g. dotless to dotted) and blocked the other (dotted to dotless). Mats --- Mats Dufberg mats.dufberg@internetstiftelsen.se Technical Expert Internetstiftelsen (The Swedish Internet Foundation) Mobile: +46 73 065 3899 https://internetstiftelsen.se/ -----Original Message----- From: Latingp <latingp-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Pitinan Kooarmornpatana <pitinan.koo@icann.org> Date: Thursday, 2 July 2020 at 13:04 To: Michael Bauland <Michael.Bauland@knipp.de>, "Tan Tanaka, Dennis" <dtantanaka@verisign.com>, ICANN Latin GP <latingp@icann.org>, "acarturk@metu.edu.tr" <acarturk@metu.edu.tr>, "acarturk@gmail.com" <acarturk@gmail.com>, "kadir.erdogan@metunic.com.tr" <kadir.erdogan@metunic.com.tr> Subject: Re: [Latingp] [Ext] Re: Re: Agenda for Latin GP meeting on 2 July 2020 16:00UTC Thank you, Micheal, your feedback is just in time. Dear All, Please find attached the updated version (v5) of the presentation incorporating Michael's input. Thank you all reviewers for comments. Talk to you soon. Regards, Pitinan -----Original Message----- From: Michael Bauland <Michael.Bauland@knipp.de> Date: Thursday, July 2, 2020 at 13:08 To: Pitinan Kooarmornpatana <pitinan.koo@icann.org>, "Tan Tanaka, Dennis" <dtantanaka@verisign.com>, "latingp@icann.org" <latingp@icann.org>, "acarturk@metu.edu.tr" <acarturk@metu.edu.tr>, "acarturk@gmail.com" <acarturk@gmail.com>, "kadir.erdogan@metunic.com.tr" <kadir.erdogan@metunic.com.tr> Subject: Re: [Latingp] [Ext] Re: Re: Agenda for Latin GP meeting on 2 July 2020 16:00UTC Hi all, I have some suggestion (sorry for being rather late): On slide 2 it says: "When someone applies for a TLD using any of these codepoints, variant TLD will be generated. Variant labels are recommended to be either assigned to the same registry operator or blocked. " To me it sounds as if the variant TLD always exists ("will be generated"). Also it's not restricted to a single variant. Maybe we could rephrase it to: "When someone applies for a TLD using any of these codepoints, all possible variant labels will be generated. These Variant labels are recommended to be either assigned to the same registry operator or blocked. " On slide 4 I think the "If" in the assumption should be removed. On Slide 5, Case 3: I don't know, whether it's important, but we could change it to make clear, the allocation does not have to be done directly. Maybe something like: "The TLD dış is registered and the TLD diş is possible to be allocated only to the same applicant, based on the policy, directly or any later time." On Slide 8 I would add an "only" to Case B, otherwise it sounds (to me) just as one of several options, it could also be assigned to another applicant (which is not the case): "Both dış or diş can be added to the root zone but could only be assigned to the same TLD applicant. " Thank you for all the work Pitinan. I think the presentation will be really helpful in today's discussion. Cheers, Michael -- ____________________________________________________________________ | | | knipp | Knipp Medien und Kommunikation GmbH ------- Technologiepark Martin-Schmeißer-Weg 9 44227 Dortmund Deutschland Dipl.-Informatiker Tel: +49 231 9703-0 Fax: +49 231 9703-200 Dr. Michael Bauland SIP: Michael.Bauland@knipp.de Software-Entwicklung E-Mail: Michael.Bauland@knipp.de Registereintrag: Amtsgericht Dortmund, HRB 13728 Geschäftsführer: Dietmar Knipp, Elmar Knipp
participants (4)
-
Mats Dufberg -
Michael Bauland -
Pitinan Kooarmornpatana -
Tan Tanaka, Dennis