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
which in Council's opinion require resolution before TLD expansion
If this is the case (and I would agree) then maybe a clearer term is
May I suggest either "threshold" or perhaps better "critical-path" ?