| A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H | I | J | K | L | M | N | O | P | Q | R | S | T | U | V | W | X | Y | Z | AA | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | Topic 12: Applicant Guidebook Description of Difference: No substantive differences, but minor differences include the following: - Emphasis was placed on the need for enhancing language support in the 6 UN languages | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2 | # | Contributor | Comment | Notes | Leadership Comments | Completion Status | |||||||||||||||||||||
3 | Support Output(s) as written | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
4 | The following contributors did not provide additional comments: NORID AS; Anthony Lee (Individual); Jamie Baxter (Individual); Thomas Barrett (Individual); NCSG; Afnic; GoDaddy Registry; gTLDs Registries Stakeholder Group (RySG); dotBERLIN GmbH & Co. KG; Hamburg Top-Level-Domain GmbH; Brand Registry Group, Inc; GeoTLD Group; Dotzon GmbH; Intellectual Property Constituency (IPC); PETILLION Law Firm; ccNSO Council; INTA; ARTICLE 19; GMO Brights Consulting Inc.; Global Brand Owner and Consumer Protection Coalition (GBOC); Internet Governance Project; ALAC | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
5 | No opinion | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
6 | The following contributors did not provide additional comments: Clement Genty (Individual); Wei Wang (Individual); Yi Zhang (Individual); Xiaodong Lee (Individual); Kun Liu (Individual); Internet Architecture Board; WIPO; Business Constituency (BC); InfoNetworks LLC | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
7 | Do not support certain aspects or all of the Output(s): AGU published in all 6 U.N. language at same time as English | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
8 | 1 | ZHOU, LiGuo (Individual) | Given the importance of timely publication and awareness building for the subsequent and future rounds, we suggest that the AGB should be available in all 6 U.N. languages at the same time with the English version, and the English version serves as the authoritative version. | Publish AGB in English and other languages simultaneously. | Discussed this issue. | ACTION ITEM: Take the discussion to the list as to whether the timeframe for the publication in UN languages could be shorter. | |||||||||||||||||||||
9 | 2 | Swiss Government OFCOM | We welcome the efforts and willingness of the WG to make the Application Guide Book (AGB) available in the 6 UN languages. However, we disagree with the recommendation that the English version of the AGB shall be available up to two months before the other language versions (Recommendations 12.5 and 12.6). We suggest that the AGB should be published at the same time in all languages. | Publish AGB in English and other languages simultaneously. | Discussed this issue. | ACTION ITEM: Take the discussion to the list as to whether the timeframe for the publication in UN languages could be shorter. | |||||||||||||||||||||
10 | 3 | Business Constituency (BC) | The BC believes that businesses in all regions of the world should have equal access and opportunity to apply for TLDs in the next round. Accordingly we believe that the AGB should be published simultaneously in English and the 6 UN languages, both 4 months prior to the commencement of the application submission period. | Publish AGB in English and other languages simultaneously. | Discussed this issue. | ACTION ITEM: Take the discussion to the list as to whether the timeframe for the publication in UN languages could be shorter. | |||||||||||||||||||||
11 | New information or interests that the Working Group has not considered | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
12 | 1 | Registars Stakeholder Group (RrSG) | The RrSG believes that the option of allowing for the selection of pre-evaluated RSP's is a substantive change to the Applicant Guidebook. The Applicant Guidebook should make it clear that if the applicant is choosing to utilize a pre-evaluated RSP, the applicant does not need to complete the technical section of the application, nor do they need to actually have selected an RSP at the time of the application submission. This will allow applicants to focus on the business aspects of their application and defer the selection of their RSP and other technical vendors until needed before entering into a Registry Agreement with ICANN. This can allow applicants to select RSPs that will best serve the applicant’s needs, potentially resulting in less registries changing back-end providers (which results in increased costs for registrars and registrants). | Copied to RSP Pre-Eval and Applicant Reviews. | No WG action noted. | ||||||||||||||||||||||
13 | 2 | ICANN org | Affirmation with Modification 12.3 and Recommendation 12.5: The PDP WG recommends that “the commencement of the application submission period will be at least four (4) months after the issue of the Applicant Guidebook.” ICANN org requests the PDP WG consider providing a minimum and maximum time frame instead of the fixed four month period. Additionally, perhaps the PDP WG may want to consider capturing recommendation 12.5 - “the English version of the Applicant Guidebook must be issued at least four (4) months prior to the commencement of the applicant submission period” - with Recommendation 12.3. Recommendation 12.4: The PDP WG recommends “focusing on the user when drafting future versions of the Applicant Guidebook (AGB) and prioritizing usability, clarity, and practicality in developing the AGB for subsequent procedures. The AGB should effectively address the needs of new applicants as well as those already familiar with the application process. It should also effectively serve those who do not speak English as a first language in addition to native English speakers.” ICANN org requests further clarity as to how the PDP WG envisions ICANN org “focus on the user.” Additionally, it would be helpful if the PDP WG could clarify as to how they see ICANN org “effectively address the needs of new applicants,” as well as how ICANN org should “effectively serve those who do not speak English as a first language.” | Discussed the issue of min/max timeframe: tried to develop a range but WG was unsuccessful. On the second issue, this is something the IRT can focus on when writing the AGB, but note that we should focus on language that is measurable. | ACTION ITEM: re: 12.4 and clarity of language: Move the Implementation Guidance 12.8 into the recommendation 12.4; staff to reach out to ICANN org to see if that language addresses the issue. | ||||||||||||||||||||||
14 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
15 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
16 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
17 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
18 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
19 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
20 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
21 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
22 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
23 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
24 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
25 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
26 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
27 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
28 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
29 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
30 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
31 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
32 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
33 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
34 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
35 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
36 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
37 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
38 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
39 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
40 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
41 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
42 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
43 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
44 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
45 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
46 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
47 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
48 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
49 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
50 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
51 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
52 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
53 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
54 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
55 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
56 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
57 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
58 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
59 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
60 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
61 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
62 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
63 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
64 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
65 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
66 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
67 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
68 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
69 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
70 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
71 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
72 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
73 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
74 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
75 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
76 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
77 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
78 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
79 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
80 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
81 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
82 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
83 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
84 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
85 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
86 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
87 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
88 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
89 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
90 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
91 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
92 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
93 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
94 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
95 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
96 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
97 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
98 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
99 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
100 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||