[APAC-Discuss] [IDN-WG] [At-Large] Draft Recommendations Overall Policy for the Selection of IDN ccTLD Strings PC

[Maureen Hilyard]

Hi Rinalia

Just a quick response... I wholeheartedly agree with the ALAC comments,
especially that IDN ccTLDs acknowledge the diversity of the growing internet
user base, and that their purpose is to encourage the use of the internet
for their benefit within their own ccTLD environments. It also promotes a
greater understanding of this diversity within the wider user community.
This is recognised in schools nowadays, even in the Pacific, where
encouragement to learn languages that use scripts other than our own is
widespread. The world is getting smaller.  Our youth are growing up with a
more global mindset and will not have any problem with what we are
establishing today. 

Maureen
 
-----Original Message-----
From: apac-discuss-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org
[mailto:apac-discuss-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Rinalia
Abdul Rahim
Sent: Tuesday, 30 October 2012 4:42 a.m.
To: No name; ALAC Working List
Cc: APRALO; At-Large Worldwide
Subject: Re: [APAC-Discuss] [IDN-WG] [At-Large] Draft Recommendations
Overall Policy for the Selection of IDN ccTLD Strings PC

Dear IDN WG and ALAC,


Please find below the revised statement on the* "Draft IDN ccTLD String
Selection Criteria, Requirements and Processes Policy Recommendations" *that
incorporates additions proposed during the Toronto meeting.  Suggestions for
further amendments *must be received by Friday (November 2nd)* for the ALAC
to commence a vote in time to meet the Reply Period deadline on November
9th.


Thanks.


Rinalia Abdul Rahim*
*


**

*
*

*
*

*ALAC Statement on the Draft IDN ccTLD String Selection Criteria,
Requirements and Processes Policy Recommendations*


The At-Large Advisory Committee (ALAC) commends the International Domain
Names (IDN) country code Policy Development Process Working Group 1 for the
comprehensiveness of its draft policy recommendations on the IDN ccTLD
String Selection Criteria, Requirements and Processes for territories listed
in the ISO 3166-1 list.  We note that the recommendations are based on the
previous work of the IDNC Working Group and we are pleased to see that the
recommendations reflect the learning drawn from the implementation of the
IDNccTLD Fast Track Process over the past few years.



We observe that the draft recommendations do not address the issue of
variant TLDs and instead contain a placeholder in Section J, which points
out that issues pertaining to the management of such TLDs are still being
discussed in the ICANN community and will be added later.  We believe that
the draft recommendations should indicate that the issue of variants is
urgent and need to be addressed in a timely manner.  Concurrently, the draft
recommendations should also affirm that the outcomes of the variants
discussion pertaining to the Label Generation Ruleset (LGR) for the Root
Zone would be binding and applicable to all TLDs (including ccTLDs), given
that the overarching principle of the LGR process is the security and
stability of the Root Zone, which is shared by all Internet users.



We note with concern that the draft recommendations consider selected IDN
ccTLD strings to be confusingly similar based on their appearance to "a
reasonable Internet user who is unfamiliar with the script" although
"linguistic, technical, and visual perception factors" will be taken into
consideration.  Notwithstanding the merit and rationale for this assessment
criterion, an assessment on confusing similarity based primarily on the
appearance of selected strings to users unfamiliar with the script may not
be consistent with the nature and purpose of IDN ccTLDs, which are
fundamentally introduced for the use and benefit of local IDN users in
pertinent ccTLD territories.  Without taking into account sufficient
linguistic factors, problematic results may occur.  For example, an IDN
ccTLD that is assessed as not confusingly similar by a user "who is
unfamiliar with the script" may well be deemed confusingly similar by the
local IDN user and vice versa.  We believe that this particular issue can be
addressed in the policy making process through more consultations with the
IDN communities in implicated ccTLD territories.



Finally, we wish to reiterate the significance and importance of IDNs,
including IDN Top Level Domains (TLDs) at both the generic and country code
levels.  IDNs are crucial for enhancing diversity and multilingualism on the
Internet.  Towards this end, the attribution of IDNs should take into
account the fact that some languages have a wide geographical distribution
that go beyond national borders and are thus not the sole property of one
sovereign state alone.  It follows, therefore, that due consideration should
be given to protecting the rights of concerned language communities which,
though falling outside the jurisdiction of one nation state, share with its
inhabitants a common language or script.

END
_______________________________________________
APAC-Discuss mailing list
APAC-Discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/apac-discuss

Homepage for the region: http://www.apralo.org