- From: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
- Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 22:40:54 -0700
- To: Phil Archer <parcher@icra.org>
- CC: public-appformats@w3.org, Public POWDER <public-powderwg@w3.org>
Phil Archer wrote: > We took the view that, with few exceptions, if you own example.com, you > have complete control over example.example.com too. Right, that was my view exactly. > It means that, in the POWDER world, you could publish a description of > "com" - i.e. everything on .com. It may be pretty meaningless, but, > well, when did language stop people saying meaningless things? :-) I don't think this is a problem for access-control, it just means that the author can target very wide audiences. But that's nothing new since he/she can already target <*> > It's tempting to try and add restrictions such as requiring at least a > 2nd level domain. This might have the desired effect for .com, .org etc, > but falls down in places where third level domains are the norm (.co.uk, > .com.au, .com.cn etc.) FWIW, i think UAs today keep lists of such two-level TLDs. I know mozilla does. It is useful in a number of circumstances. / Jonas
Received on Thursday, 26 July 2007 05:42:35 UTC