Thanks Elisa - it seems to me after reviewing the zoom that the IRT is discussing singulars and plurals which are not necessarily "in the same language" but rather those singulars and plurals which are verifiable in "the same language dictionary", even if the intention on the part of the applicant is to apply for a word with a different meaning in a different language as expressed in a different dictionary. The Supplemental Recommendation uses the phrase "in the same language" but the IRT examples of "kind" and "kinder" and "chat" and "chats" demonstrate that "in the same language" is actually a different standard and likely not workable. It seems that if the Board approves a new policy recommendation, it would have to refer to two terms that appear in the same language dictionary as the singular and plural of one another, again regardless of the intended language and regardless of the intended meaning for the words in the applied-for strings. I was in the minority speaking against this Supplemental Recommendation but am comfortable with the Board's new policy regarding "replacement string" which can be submitted at the time of the application for the primary string. So I am only commenting on the difficulty associated with implementation of a standard expressed as "in the same language" - as evidenced in today's zoom meeting on this topic. With respect to implementation of the singular/plural policy, it would seem the Board should not be using "in the same language" as the policy statement to be adopted. A clearer standard might be "verified as the plural and singular in the same language dictionary". Separately, I still wonder what it is about the new draft AGB language which prohibits private resolution to prevent a notification to ICANN of a singular and plural found in the same language dictionary. As we know, if no notification occurs, both strings may proceed since string Similarity guidelines will not deal with singulars and plurals. On the web form, will notifiers need to attest that they have not engaged in any such private negotiations? Will there be a penalty if it later turns out they did? Thank you, Anne Anne Aikman-Scalese GNSO Councilor NomCom Non-Voting 2022-2026 anneicanngnso@gmail.com On Tue, Oct 29, 2024 at 5:58 AM Elisa Busetto via SubPro-IRT < subpro-irt@icann.org> wrote:

Dear all,

Please find here <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1u-2f-8sZZtH4-_T2iFuv1w4wG48CGTf4SGMseFOg8qQ/edit?usp=sharing> the Singular/Plural Notification language we just discussed. You can find the pdf and docx versions on the meeting page <https://community.icann.org/x/K4AUFg>.

Best,

Elisa _______________________________________________ SubPro-IRT mailing list -- subpro-irt@icann.org To unsubscribe send an email to subpro-irt-leave@icann.org

_______________________________________________ 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.