fter some discussion at the Registries Constituency today, would
like to make
the following suggested edits to #9.
The current wording:
9. There should be only one IDN ccTLD string per ISO 3166-1 entry per
relevant script. Measures must be taken to limit confusion and
collisions due
to variants.
Suggested edit:
9. There should be only one IDN ccTLD string per ISO 3166-1 entry per
relevant script, except in those cases where one script is used for
multiple
languages and governmental policy makes selecting a single string
inappropriate. Measures must be taken to limit confusion and
collisions due to
variants.
The rationale for the edit is to provide for the situation is for
example in
India where one script is used for multiple languages and the
representation
of "india" in those different languages using the same script may be
different.
We would have to make a change to the main body as well, mainly with
regards
to the response to:
a) Should there similarly be only a single IDN ccTLD for a given
script for
each ¡¥territory¡¦ or can there be multiple IDN ccTLD strings? For
example,
should there be only one equivalent of .cn in Chinese script for
China or .ru
in Cyrillic for Russia?
Proposed GNSO response: Yes, the GNSO believes that there should be
only one
string per ISO 3166-1 entry per relevant script.
Suggested change to the proposed response:
Yes, the GNSO believes that there should be only one string per ISO
3166-1
entry per relevant script., except in those cases where one script
is used for
multiple languages and governmental policy makes selecting a single
string
inappropriate. Measures must be taken to limit confusion and
collisions due to
variants.
Edmon