Page History

PROPOSED AGENDA

1. Welcome/Agenda Review

1. /SOI Updates

2. Approach for Next Steps/One-Pager (See one-pager here:https://docs.google.com/document/d/

1. 19eNzjIQ7qcnzV_Zk3QIeB1aisAyUvJvJuG2lkV7qjEY/edit?usp=sharing and attached)

1. Wrap up & comments on sections covered on 29th May (2-char and 3-char on the ISO 3166-1)
2. Summary Document Review Continued
   1. Country and Territory Names
   2. Geographic Terms Requiring Letters of Support/Non-Objection
3. AOB 

For agenda items 3 and 4, please review the Google document at: https://docs.google.com/document/d/

1rsyxCEBd6ax3Rb_w1kms_E9n29XL1_lw3Yp9XQ4TeCY/edit?

ts=5ce64d6d# and attached as a current snapshot of the living document. This document seeks to condense and organize the public input received to WT5’s Initial Report.

Background Documents

Foundational Issues_Summary Document

Overarching Issues_Summary Document

Work Track 5 Overview.pdf

WT5_Summary Document.pdf

Audio Recording

Zoom Recording

Chat Transcript

GNSO transcripts are located on the GNSO Calendar

Attendance  

Dial out: Vernatius EzeamaAttendance  

Apologies:  Dr Luca Barbero, Jorge Cancio, Bram Fudzulani

Notes/ Action Items

Actions and Brief Notes:

Actions:

ACTION ITEM 1: Languages -- Co-Leads to send a note to the list suggesting a recommendation for languages.

Notes:

1. Updates to Statements of Interests (SOIs): No updates provided.

2. Approach for Next Steps/One-Pager (See one-pager here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/19eNzjIQ7qcnzV_Zk3QIeB1aisAyUvJvJuG2lkV7qjEY/edit?usp=sharing and attached)

-- Gives too much weight to the public comments and not as much to the work of WT5 itself.

-- Not taking into account minority positions in WT5.

-- Clearly states that the comments can inform the group if they feel there need to be any adjustments.  WT5 can assess if there is anything new that we need to take into account and that may impact the recommendations in the Initial Report.

3. Wrap up & comments on sections covered on 29th May (2-char and 3-char on the ISO 3166-1)

4. Summary Document Review Continued

a. Country and Territory Names (Recommendations 2-9)

Outstanding Items - New Ideas/Concerns/Divergence

Long-form name listed in the ISO 3166-1 standard, Short-form name listed in the ISO 3166-1 standard, Short- or long-form name association with a code that has been designated as “exceptionally reserved” by the ISO 3166 Maintenance Agency:

-- BRG concerns; NCSG divergence; INTA concerns.

Separable component of a country name designated on the “Separable Country Names List”:

-- INTA concerns: Names listed in Class C refer to synonyms of the country name, or sub-national entities, and so are not separable components of country names, and therefore should not be reserved. Should this change current policy?

-- It’s about whether the names in this class should be reserved.  Seems to be support to keeping them as reserved as we can’t determine what should be reserved and what shouldn’t.

Permutation or transposition of any of the names included in items (i) through (v):

-- Comments are confusing.  Can we do a better job to improve the clarity.

-- Initial Report stated agreement that strings resulting from transpositions or permutations of 3-letter codes listed in the ISO 3166-1 should be allowed.

-- May need to recommend that this section of the AGB should be edited to be more clear.

-- Actually there should be added text -- "Strings resulting from permutations and transpositions of alpha-3 codes which are themselves not on the ISO 3166-1 list should be allowed"

-- If a new 3-letter country code should be added to the list there should be a replacement code for that country (if already delegated).

Additions:

• Suggestion for text change from Justine Chew: "Strings resulting from permutations and transpositions of alpha-3 codes which are themselves not on the ISO 3166-1 list should be allowed"
• Suggestion to clarify the definition of “permutation” and “transposition.” Is the current definition exhaustive?

Languages:

-- This is an open issue.  WT5 has not put forward any preliminary recommendations.

-- No consensus in the comments.

-- Need to think about what is practical for a recommendation.

-- Last ICANN meeting: “official languages” and UN languages.  Still issues because some countries don’t use UN languages and have other official languages that they use.

-- Needs to be predictable and practical to apply.

-- Need something that is not impossible for the applicant.

-- Note that ISO 639 exists - The purpose of ISO 639 is to establish internationally recognised codes (either 2, 3, or 4 letters long) for the representation of languages or language families. https://www.iso.org/iso-639-language-codes.html

Addition:

• Suggestion that curative protections might also make sense.
• Send a note to the list.

b. Geographic Terms Requiring Letters of Support/Non-Objection

5. AOB -- items from Christopher Wilkinson:

a. Currency Codes

-- Serious risks to the financial system if the currency codes are not reserved and protected.  Insist that this is taken up by the PDP as a whole.

b. .amazon decision

-- On the position, follow what is happening between the governments and the company, and further discussions that will happen in the GAC.