W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > May 2006

Re: dot tel - a new TLD

From: <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>
Date: Tue, 16 May 2006 17:36:27 -0400
To: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Cc: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>, Daniel Dardailler <danield@w3.org>, Thomas Roessler <tlr@w3.org>, www-tag@w3.org
Message-ID: <OF0BF87CF4.11A8A070-ON85257170.00762259-85257170.0076B211@lotus.com>

Dan Connolly writes:

> -- A Web Address for a Phone Number? Do .Tel
> By Ben Charny
> May 15, 2006 
> http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,1962924,00.asp
> 
> Sigh... why not tel.hertz.com?

Indeed, or why not:  application/telephoneNumber+xml?   That way I don't 
need to bury in any aspect of the URI the nature of the resource, but can 
return a phone number as the reprsentation for anything that's reasonably 
represented by a phone number.  I'm probably missing some history that 
leads one to want to put this in the name in a standard way, but the 
rationale isn't clear to me.  Seems pretty close to insiting on naming 
JPEG files with URIs that have a .jpeg suffix.

In fact, a Web services bigot might say:  why not application/soap+xml, 
with the returned envelope:

<s:envelope>
  ...header here can put dsig to crosscheck
     the phone number...
  ...header here can encrypt the phone number..
  <s:body  xmlns:t="....">
      <t:telephoneNumber>1234567<t:telephoneNumber>
  </s:body>
</s:envelope>

Overall I'm suggesting that the fact that it's a phone number be encoded 
in the returned representation, and not (at least not in a standard idiom) 
in the URI.

--------------------------------------
Noah Mendelsohn 
IBM Corporation
One Rogers Street
Cambridge, MA 02142
1-617-693-4036
--------------------------------------
Received on Tuesday, 16 May 2006 21:36:47 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 12:47:40 GMT