ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives

[council]

<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

RE: [council] Topic for Sunday night Dinner in Sydney

  • To: "Philip Sheppard" <philip.sheppard@xxxxxx>, "Council GNSO" <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: RE: [council] Topic for Sunday night Dinner in Sydney
  • From: "Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 27 May 2009 11:20:20 -0400
  • In-reply-to: <BD90DE9F9B2841DAB4A0F8B160F02D30@PSEVO>
  • List-id: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • References: <BF255F90-CD6F-43BF-9B0E-0ACFCA9FF662@psg.com> <BD90DE9F9B2841DAB4A0F8B160F02D30@PSEVO>
  • Sender: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Thread-index: Acnee56Z8n/ozo5SRfi2Y9okIKbtQgAYN/BgAAB/nrA=
  • Thread-topic: [council] Topic for Sunday night Dinner in Sydney
Philip,

I believe that the term 'overarching" is used because that is
specifically what ICANN Staff used in referring to the four overarching
issues, two of which are included.

Chuck 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
> [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Philip Sheppard
> Sent: Wednesday, May 27, 2009 11:13 AM
> To: 'Council GNSO'
> Subject: [council] Topic for Sunday night Dinner in Sydney
> 
> 
> Avri,
> I support your list and the suggestions to date.
> I have one question on vocabulary.
> 
> You use the word "overarching" in:
> - Pending issue in restructuring
> - overarching issue for new gTLDs - IRT
> - overarching issue for new gTLDs - geographic names
> 
> 
> Do you intend to mean all-embracing, or more precisely, that 
> these are issues which in Council's opinion require 
> resolution before TLD expansion can proceed?
> If this is the case (and I would agree) then maybe a clearer 
> term is needed.
> 
> May I suggest either "threshold" or perhaps better "critical-path" ?
> 
> Philip
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>
<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>