[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[wg-c] bounced message, reposted for Ross Rader
>From: "Ross Wm. Rader" <email@example.com>
>To: "matt hooker" <firstname.lastname@example.org>, email@example.com
>Subject: Re: [wg-c] URGENT: Moratorium on all additions to confusing GTLDs
and ccTLDs Required.
>Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1999 10:30:41 -0500
>Cc: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org
>On Mon, 22 Nov 1999, matt hooker wrote:
>> The objection, which follows, to my proposal is a bad one. The analogy
>> bad one too. We do not use phone numbers as easily as we use words. We can
>> remember words more easily also. An area code simply adds a few more
>> to a number. A TLD adds 2 or 3 (so far) letters - that may have no meaning
>> of their own, to a word or string of words or letters that has a meaning
>> is usually easy to remember. People do not try to remember phone numbers
>> with their associated area codes, but rather keep lists or use directory
>> information services.
>The implication that you make is that DNS should serve as a directory service
>in addition to the functions that it already performs. I'm not sure that you
>are completely aware of the true depth of your position. As my grandmother
>to say - be careful what you ask for.
>> With a domain name and the internet, people can
>> remember names as long as there are not too many TLDs added on to those
>> names. There are already too many TLDs added to the names (SLDs) for easy
>> human use and memory. To add more TLDs will only make this situation
>> Furthermore, with telephone numbers and area codes, one knows that the
>> code refers to a specific country, and area of a county. No such
>> can be derived from and of the gTLDs or many (and, I might add, an ever
>> increasing number) of the ccTLDs.
>Deriving geographical information from a TLD is just as useless as trying
>derive geographical information from the area code of my cell-phone - 416.
>you tell where I am today? Does it matter? If you took the time to call me
>visit my website, do a whois) would this not clear up the problem you
>Is this not simpler than putting extra overhead on DNS?
>> Thus without the associated place, which
>> is what allows humans to sometimes remember area codes, (because they
>> remember the physical location of the phone), it is much more difficult
>> a human to remember an often meaningless gTLD or ccTLD, along with the
>> domain name itself. To have to choose among 5 or 10 or more domain names
>> which are exactly the same, with the exception of the TLDs at the end of
>> name is extremely difficult for the human memory and leads to confusion.
>You keep repeating this assertion, but fail to back it up. If words are as
>to remember as you have said time and time again, then it shouldn't be a
>problem to remember a three character extension. You made the assertion,
>back it up because as it stands, your logic plays nicely into my position
>area codes and TLDs serve extremely similar roles and provide a uniquely
>accurate analog for what we propose to undertake.
>> have to do this for any more than are already in existence - well, most
>> people won't be able to do it at all, and vast confusion will set in. We
>> need to REDUCE the number of TLDs NOT increase it.
>1. There are too many domain names already
>2. Multiple TLDs serve to confuse the end user
>3. New TLDs will not alleviate this confusion
>Ergo, we should not create new TLDs?
>In light of the fact that you have not provided any substantiating fact to
>up your conclusions, I will have to kindly oppose your request for
>OTOH, if you can conclusively provide fact that backs up your three main
>points, then perhaps we should all take pause.