<div dir="ltr"><div>Dear NCSG,</div><div><br></div><div>The Internationalized Domain Names (IDN) EPDP team is currently discussing charter questions on how string similarity should be performed on variant labels of future TLD labels.</div><div>3 options described as <i>levels</i> were proposed as you will see on the attached slide deck and the team is to choose one of them. I'll try to summarize the description of the 3 levels below and indicate my preferred level.</div><div><br></div><div><b><u>Notes for those not familiar with the topic:</u></b></div><div><i>In IDNs, a TLD has a primary label (P) and variants (v), which are labels in different languages and/or scripts of the primary label.<br>Consider <b>P1</b> as the applied-for primary gTLD 1 and P1 could have variant labels, say three for the sake of this discussion:<br>○ <span style="background-color:rgb(0,255,0)"><b>P1v1</b></span>: allocatable and requested for activation<br>○ <span style="background-color:rgb(255,153,0)"><span style="color:rgb(0,0,0)"><b>P1v2</b></span></span>: allocatable but not requested<br>○ <span style="background-color:rgb(255,0,0)"><b>P1v3</b></span>: blocked</i></div><div><br></div><div>Now, the question is, during an application round, for string similarity reviews, should P with its variants P1v1, P1v2 & P1v3 be compared with <br></div><div><ul><li><b>Level 1</b>:<b> Existing & applied for Primary labels + ONLY Requested Allocatable Variants</b></li><ul><li><u>Pros</u>: (a) Limited pool of labels for comparison;
(b) Simplest, fastest & least expensive to conduct the review
</li><li><u>Cons</u>: An entity may potentially not be able to apply for its label variant (P1v2) in the future if another entity applies for a label or variant which causes it to be visually confusable to P1v2.</li></ul></ul></div><div></div><div><ul><li><b>Level 2: Existing & applied for Primary labels + ALL Allocatable Variants</b></li><ul><li><u>Pros:</u> (a) Relatively manageable pool of labels for comparison, except for certain TLDs in Arabic; (b) Allows entities to ensure that all of their allocatable strings and all other possible future similar strings would be blocked. This creates predictability because all entities have their original string and allocatable variants.</li><li><u>Cons</u>: (a) Certain TLDs in Arabic may have extremely large<br>number of allocatable variants, therefore more expensive than Level 1; (b) 7 scripts in RZ-LGR-5 have allocatable variants</li></ul></ul></div><div><ul><li><b>Level 3: Existing & applied for Primary labels + ALL Variants (Blocked & Allocatable)</b></li><ul><li><u>Pros</u>: Maximally conservative approach and may reduce the possibility of visual confusability among all valid labels in an application round.</li><li><u>Cons</u>: (a) Slowest, most complicated & expensive to conduct the review; (b) 21 scripts in RZ-LGR-5 have variants; (c) Certain TLDs in Arabic, Cyrillic & Latin may have extremely large number of blocked variants; (d) May reject strings due to conflict with blocked variants that will never be delegated.</li></ul></ul></div><div>I previously gave my personal preference to the working group as being Level 2. However, the more I read through available information and listen to debate on this issue, the more I lean towards Level 1. Therefore, I would love to hear what NCSG members think so that the Policy Committee can agree on an official NCSG preference.</div><div>I understand this is a bit of a complex topic, but<b> if we don't get any responses by Thursday May 5, we'll assume no official NCSG preference</b>.<br></div><div><div><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div><br></div><div>Warmly,<br></div>Tomslin<div><span style="color:rgb(0,0,0);font-size:12.8px"></span></div><div><span style="color:rgb(0,0,0);font-size:12.8px">@LinkedIn: <a href="https://www.linkedin.com/in/tomslin/" target="_blank">https://www.linkedin.com/in/tomslin/</a><br></span></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div>