Re: [DNSOP] Top level names -- precision re categories and where are are the uncertainties?

[Jaap Akkerhuis <[e-mail]>]

 Steve Crocker writes:

 > Folks,
 > 
 > I`ve been watching the dialog on this list regarding to level names.
 > Attached is my attempt to clarify the state of affairs and identify the
 > loose ends.  Both PDF and pptx versions attached, the latter in case
 > someone is moved to edit the slides directly.


Either I don't understand the slides or they seem to be inconsistent.
As an example, you defines 8 "states" [1] and 8 definitions (later
called "Categories: when you give exanples. However the examples
doesn't match the definitions:

	Definition 2: Names that have not been formally recognized but
		are being used privately or for applications that have
		not yet become standard

	Definition 3: Two letter Latin characters that have not yet
		been assigned by the ISO 3166 maintenance agency but
		might be in the future.

	Category 2: xq

	Category 3: onion

Are these mistakes or purposely. (There seem to be more of these cases
on the slides).

	jaap



[1] I'm not sure whether this is a proper term. Can one state move to another?