[wg-review] [Agenda] Fitting language/translation in & schedule

[Greg Burton <sidna@feedwriter.com>]

At 03:59 PM 1/17/01, Eric Dierker wrote:
>On the other hand I would like to know where in Mr. Burton's categories this
>thread belongs.

Half procedures and half constituencies, I'd say :

[DNSO Structure Discussion] ccTLD should be in the DNSO?
If not, what could be the potential model?

I think these would legitimately fall in the constituencies discussion, and 
would hope that we have a lot of input from ccTLD folks. The other two are 
probably beyond the scope of this group before February 20th.

The language issue is VERY important to a great many people, and needs to 
be discussed further. Currently the list is

>1. Preliminary Report Discussion and Approval
>2. Constituencies
>3. General Assembly
>4. Names Council
>5. Work Groups
>6. Standardized Procedures and Language/Translation Issues
>7. Outreach
add  8: Final Preparation, Vote and Report Approval

Comments so far:
Bret suggest that, where a contention is made, or, something is proposed, 
brief justification and background, should be included. This is a great 
idea, but I'm not sure how basic we can get. We can certainly try for it.

Joanna suggested discussion of what are now 2,3,4 before voting, and this 
is a great idea. However, for the 5,6,7 group, that would put a LOT of 
material up at the end of our schedule, and I'm concerned that some of the 
material might get handled carelessly in the rush to complete reports. Bret 
suggested adding 5 to 2,3,4 - I can definitely sympathize, but that really 
would be too big a lump to handle all at once.

Comments?


Regards,
Greg

sidna@feedwriter.com

--
This message was passed to you via the wg-review@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe wg-review" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html