Sunday 818 October 17:00-18:30 at Wicklow MR5

Link to recording

1. Attendance

2. Welcome

3. Background to the LGP

4. Coverage of the LGP

5. Formation of the panel

6. Work plan for LGP

7. Dates of next meetings

8. AOB

Meeting notes


Eric Brunner-Williams (Co-Chair), Chris Dillon (Co-Chair), Paul Hoffman, Mert Saka, Mirjana Tasic, Asmus Freytag (Integration Panel), ICANN staff: Sarmad Hussain and Alireza Saleh

Coverage of the LGP

  • The panel lacks representation, especially in Central, Eastern and South East Asia and Australia/New Zealand. Coverage of languages using many diacritics, such as Vietnamese, is especially important.
  • Romanization systems, such as Pinyin for Mandarin Chinese, are in field.
  • IPA symbols effectively become Latin script if they are integrated into a language’s script.

Action: Panel members to look out for new members at IGF and similar meetings

Formation of the Panel

The Panel is not as close to being formed as had been hoped.

The Cyrillic Panel is about to be formed and Mirjana Tasic has agreed to act in a liaison role between the two panels. Communication with the Armenian Panel and the future Greek Panel is also desirable. It is necessary for the LGP to check whether Georgian is separable.

Work plan for LGP

The plan tabled at the meeting needs major modifications including the addition of a description of the languages covered, a schedule and information about funding for local workshops, etc.


  • Online samples of languages could be used for attestation, although they could contain some false positives.
  • Useful resources include CLDR (Unicode Common Locale Data Repository) and Omniglot.
  • It was suggested that a good practical way to assemble attestations of code points would be to put MSR2 in Excel and mark each code point with a language in which it commonly occurs. In the case of languages with lower EGIDS (Expanded Graded Intergenerational Disruption Scale) scores, several languages should be listed in case any do not qualify for coverage by the LGP.
  • Code point exclusion criteria include historical, religious or poetic usage. Non-technical usage in one language is enough of a criterion for inclusion.
  • Once a repertoire is created, issues raised by combining marks should be addressed.
  • The possibility of the Latin script’s having allocatable variants should be revisited.
  • This draft repertoire, once it is created, should be sent to a wider group of linguists for comment. Any code points discovered in languages and not in MSR2 should be listed. Code points such as the apostrophe and combining marks are likely to fall in this category.

Other points

Dates of next meetings

Tuesday every two weeks at UTC 17:00, with a first meeting on November 10, has been tentatively agreed but will be confirmed by email.


  • No labels