Re: [wg-c] reposted for Hal Lubsen

[tinwee@pobox.org.sg]

Item One: Yes
Item Two: Yes
Item Three: Yes but only as a informational/coordination/liaison working group 
     and to 
     - charter specialist groups like the nascent Multilingual Internet Names
       Consortium MINC to elaborate on policy issue and technical issues, 
     - IETF's IDN working group to handle technical protocol issues etc.

Tin Wee
--
Dr Tan Tin Wee
National University of Singapore
tinwee@pobox.org.sg


> >> PROPOSED ROUGH CONSENSUS ITEM NUMBER ONE
> >>
> >> The initial rollout should include a range of top level domains, from open
> >> TLDs to restricted TLDs with more limited scope.
> >>
> >>
> >> PROPOSED ROUGH CONSENSUS ITEM NUMBER TWO
> >>
> >> Criteria for assessing a gTLD application, subject to current technical
> >> constraints and evolving technical opportunities, should be based on all
> >of
> >> the following principles :
> >>
> >> 1. Meaning: An application for a TLD should explain the significance of
> >the
> >> proposed TLD string, and how the applicant contemplates that the new TLD
> >> will be perceived by the relevant population of net users.  The
> >application
> >> may contemplate that the proposed TLD string will have its primary
> >semantic
> >> meaning in a language other than English.
> >>
> >> 2. Enforcement: An application for a TLD should explain the mechanism for
> >> charter enforcement where relevant and desired.
> >>
> >> 3. Differentiation: The selection of a TLD string should not confuse net
> >> users, and so TLDs should be clearly differentiated by the string and/or
> >by
> >> the marketing and functionality associated with the string.
> >>
> >> 4. Diversity: New TLDs are important to meet the needs of an expanding
> >> Internet community.  They should serve both commercial and non-commercial
> >> goals.
> >>
> >> 5. Honesty: A TLD should not unnecessarily increase opportunities for
> >> malicious or criminal elements who wish to defraud net users.
> >>
> >> 6. Competition: The authorization process for new TLDs should not be used
> >> as a means of protecting existing service providers from competition.
> >>
> >> PROPOSED ROUGH CONSENSUS ITEM NUMBER THREE
> >>
> >> WG-C recommends that the Names Council charter a working group to develop
> >> policy regarding internationalized domain names using non-ASCII
> >characters.
> >>
> >> Jon