[NCSG-PC] [GNSO-SG-C-Leadership] Request for Early Input | GNSO Latin Script Diacritics Policy Development Process Working Group

[Rafik Dammak]

Hi all,

The deadline for submitting input passed few days ago but I am wondering if
we should send something anyway based on what Tapani shared. @Tapani
Tarvainen <ncsg at tapani.tarvainen.info>  the WG is able to accommodate a
late submission if any?

Best,

Rafik


On Wed, Apr 9, 2025, 23:52 Tapani Tarvainen <ncsg at tapani.tarvainen.info>
wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Following up here, as I posted on the discuss list the LD PDP WG met
> again today and discussed another to me arbitrary-looking limitation
> of the charter, namely whether the PDP scope includes cases where
> someone applies for diacritic versions of a string only and not the
> base ASCII version.
>
> It was pretty much agreed that there's no technical or other apparent
> reason to exclude them except that the language of the charter
> explicitly talks about base ASCII version being present. It was
> suggested this may have been an oversight on the part of the council,
> someone said that it had not even occurred to them that there might be
> several different diacritic versions of the same character but since
> it's been agreed that the WG will consider such, it makes no sense to
> exclude applications for diacritic versions only.
>
> It was suggested but not decided that the WG might go back to
> the council to ask for clarification or extension of the charter
> to include such cases that could naturally be dealt with at
> the same time.
>
> When the council considers the project plan of the WG (tomorrow
> unless I'm mistaken) some of our councillors might want to alert
> the council about the issue.
>
> In any case I'm planning to write up all such cases that the PDP
> charter excludes for no good reason other than that they did not occur
> to the council at the time the PDP was created. I will then suggest we
> put them in our response to the early input request.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Tapani
>
> On Mon, Apr 07, 2025 at 04:32:39PM +0300, Tapani Tarvainen (
> ncsg at tapani.tarvainen.info) wrote:
> >
> > Thank you Rafik.
> >
> > I took the liberty of adding myself back to the PC list (it's been
> > customary for former Chairs to be there, but I removed myself from
> > there some years ago).
> >
> > Anyway, following up today's PC call, the Latin Diacritics WG
> > project plan is here:
> >
> >
> https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/policy/2025/presentation/project-plan-latin-script-diacritics-26mar25-en.pdf
> >
> > Timeline can be found there even if not in the most readable form.
> >
> > I'll add a quote from the slides presented in WG meeting:
> >
> > "When the Next Round similarity process finds ASCII/diacritic gTLDs to
> > be similar, this WG will provide rules for diacritics."
> >
> > So the intent is to affect the Next Round.
> >
> > (Slide 9 in WG meeting two, the whole slide deck can be found under
> > backround documents here:
> >
> https://icann-community.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/gnsolsdpdp/pages/176029697/2025-04-02+Latin+Script+Diacritics+-+Meeting+02
> )
> >
> > And as I said I find it odd that the rules will be defined for, e.g.,
> > German/Swedish/Finnish/Estonian/Icelandic ö (o with two dots) but not
> > for Norwegian/Danish/Faroese ø (o with stroke).
> >
> > I can imagine a Dane called Sjøberg being annoyed if a Swede gets
> > .sjöberg and an Icelander gets .sjóberg while .sjøberg is being
> > denied because of a technicality.
> >
> > There are other similar cases. I would have preferred including all
> > confusingly similar-looking non-ASCII additions to the Latin script
> > rather than using the technical Unicode definition that users should
> > really not be expected to care of know about.
> >
> > Tapani
> >
> > On Thu, Apr 03, 2025 at 10:02:01AM +0900, Rafik Dammak (
> rafik.dammak at gmail.com) wrote:
> > >
> > > hi all,
> > >
> > > a reminder about this request for input. added Tapani in cc as he is an
> > > active participant of this WG.
> > >
> > > Best,
> > >
> > > Rafik
> > >
> > >
> > > Le ven. 21 mars 2025 à 09:48, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com> a
> > > écrit :
> > >
> > > > hi all,
> > > >
> > > > we got this request for input as part of the newly established WG on
> latin
> > > > scripts diacritics.
> > > >
> > > > Best,
> > > >
> > > > Rafik
> > > >
> > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------
> > > >
> > > > Dear SG/C Leaders,
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > We are writing to you on behalf of the GNSO Latin Script Diacritics
> (LD)
> > > > Policy Development Process (PDP) Working Group (WG). This WG is
> tasked with
> > > > providing the GNSO Council policy recommendations on: The limited
> > > > circumstances in which a base ASCII gTLD and the Latin script
> diacritic
> > > > version of the gTLD can be simultaneously delegated. The WG held its
> first
> > > > meeting
> > > > <
> https://icann82.sched.com/event/1vpYP/gnso-latin-script-diacritics-pdp-working-group
> >
> > > > on 08 March, 2025.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > In accordance with GNSO’s PDP requirements, we are seeking early
> written
> > > > input on the topic from each Supporting Organization, Advisory
> Committee,
> > > > and GNSO’s Stakeholder Group / Constituency. Each group has been
> invited to
> > > > participate in the PDP. Kindly note that the written input is
> completely
> > > > voluntary.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > In order to ensure that the WG receives your input in a timely
> manner and
> > > > that your input is incorporated into a summary document for the WG’s
> > > > consideration, we are requesting a response *no later than 24 April
> 2025*
> > > > *.* Input received after this date may be introduced into the
> discussion
> > > > separately by your representatives, by ICANN support staff, or by me
> as the
> > > > relevant topic is discussed.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > The WG’s scope of work is defined through a series of questions
> presented
> > > > in the WG’s Charter. The list of questions and key issues to consider
> > > > soliciting community input are attached for your convenience. To the
> extent
> > > > possible, you are requested to write your responses to the individual
> > > > questions in the attached document and return via email to the GNSO
> > > > Secretariat *gnso-secs at icann.org <gnso-secs at icann.org>*. It is not
> > > > necessary to answer every question, and you are also welcome to
> provide any
> > > > other input and/or background information that you deem helpful to
> the
> > > > deliberations.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > As with all GNSO PDPs, there will be additional opportunities for
> > > > community input as the work progresses.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Thank you very much and we look forward to receiving your input.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On behalf of the LD PDP WG,
> > > >
> > > > Michael Bauland (LD PDP WG Chair)
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> >
> > --
> > Tapani Tarvainen
> > _______________________________________________
> > NCSG-PC mailing list
> > NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
> > https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
>
> --
> Tapani Tarvainen
> _______________________________________________
> NCSG-PC mailing list
> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20250430/6103359f/attachment.htm>