ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives


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

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

  • To: Council GNSO <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: Re: [council] Topic for Sunday night Dinner in Sydney
  • From: Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 27 May 2009 11:24:37 -0400
  • In-reply-to: <BD90DE9F9B2841DAB4A0F8B160F02D30@PSEVO>
  • List-id: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • References: <BF255F90-CD6F-43BF-9B0E-0ACFCA9FF662@psg.com> <BD90DE9F9B2841DAB4A0F8B160F02D30@PSEVO>
  • Sender: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx


I appreciate the topics that are coming in and will probably prepare the poll after tomorrow's council meeting.

I was using overarching, as a category heading that corresponded to the one the Implementation Staff was using for these topics.

But then again I mistakenly put geographic names under that heading.

Maybe I will just use something mild like Critical Issues: and leave determination of whether they are gating issues or not to the conversation (assuming these are the preferred topics for the diner). I will probably follow the practice of the last few meetings of picking a main topic and a dessert topic based on the poll.



On 27 May 2009, at 11:13, Philip Sheppard wrote:

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" ?


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