The wording is chosen to mean when the ccpdp process and not the IDN ccTLD Fast Track process.
Hope this clarifies the issue.
From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Stéphane Van Gelder
Sent: Saturday, October 31, 2009 7:13 PM
To: Gomes, Chuck; Glen de Saint Géry; Council GNSO
Subject: Re: [council] FW: Proposal for updated charter of the JIG WG
Maybe I’m not understanding the proposed change. Does adding “Upon adoption of either the Recommendations from the ccNSO policy development process on the introduction and delegation of IDN ccTLDs” not mean that the JIG effectively closes on Nov 16, the date the IDN ccTLD fast-track starts?
Le 31/10/09 01:09, « Gomes, Chuck » <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx> a écrit :
Let's make sure this is on our agenda for 23 Nov. In the meantime, in my opinion, the change looks pretty benign to me. Does anyone think differently?
From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Glen de Saint Géry
Sent: Friday, October 30, 2009 3:01 AM
To: Council GNSO
Subject: [council] FW: Proposal for updated charter of the JIG WG
Forwarded From: Bart Boswinkel
Included the proposed updated charter for the JIG WG. Could you forward it to the GNSO Council and request to adopt the charter as well?
The change is last paragraph. Proposed closing date is now either adoption of IDN ccPDP recommendations or adoption of new gTLD application Guidebook.
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature