Draft Agenda

  1. Welcome
  2. Roll Call
  3. Statements of Interest
  4. Responses From SO/ACs (IPC and any others received at: 13 Community Input ) and relevant documents.
  5. Review Work Plan and Consider Next Steps
  6. AOB

Actions:

1.  Responses from SOs/ACs: Review relevant documents posted at https://community.icann.org/display/tatcipdp/7+Studies+and+Background+Documents and in particular the following reports:

--EWG IRD Interim Report (10 April 2014): https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/41891674/EWG%20IRD.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1398951380000&api=v2
--Study on Available Solutions for the Submission and Display of Internationalized Contact Data: https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/41891674/transform-dnrd-02jun14-en.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1401880342000&api=v2.
2.  The Chairs should encourage the WG members who are from the Registrar SG to participate in the WG meetings.

3.  Develop slides for London: 1) update for GNSO Council; 2) slides for public meeting

For Review:

  1. Public comment review tool T&T - 29 May2014.doc
  2. Summary of Current Status/Next Steps (Stock Taking) 17 April 2014
  3. Interim Report from the Expert Working Group on Internationalized Registration Data 10 April 2014
  4. Status update report from the EWG on gTLD Directory Services 11 November 2013
  5. WHOIS Accuracy Program Specification part of the 2013 Registrar Accreditation Agreement
  6. Study to evaluate available solutions for the submission and display of internationalized contact data

Proposed Questions:

  1.  What is contact information (review and expand on the taxonomies)?
  2. Why are we doing this?; is this particular feature necessary?
  3. Who gets access to what?
  4. Who are the stakeholders?; who is affected? and what do they want (linking back to What)?
  5. How much would a particular feature cost and how to weigh the costs versus the benefits?
  6. When would policy come into effect?
  7. What should be mandatory?
  8. What is the difference between verification and validation?

Main questions (from the charter)

  1. Whether it is desirable to translate contact information to a single common language or transliterate contact information to a single common script.
  2. Who should decide who should bear the burden [of] translating contact information to a single common language or transliterating contact information to a single common script.

Other questions (in the charter)

  • What exactly the benefits to the community are of translating and/or transliterating contact data, especially in light of the costs that may be connected to translation and or transliteration?
  • Should translation and/or transliteration of contact data be mandatory for all gTLDs?
  • Should translation and/or transliteration of contact data be mandatory for all registrants or only those based in certain countries and/or using specific non-ASCII scripts?
  • What impact will translation/transliteration of contact data have on the WHOIS validation as set out under the 2013 Registrar Accreditation Agreement?
  • When should any new policy relating to translation and transliteration of contact information come into effect?

Related Links:

  1.  WHOIS Review Team Internationalized Registration Data Expert Working Group: https://community.icann.org/display/whoisird/WHOIS+RT+IRD+WG+Home
  2. Expert Working Group on gTLD Directory Services: http://www.icann.org/en/groups/other/gtld-directory-services
  • No labels