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

RE: dot tel - a new TLD

From: Rice, Ed (ProCurve) <ed.rice@hp.com>
Date: Fri, 19 May 2006 09:09:18 -0700
Message-ID: <7D6953BFA3975C44BD80BA89292FD60E04CE643A@cacexc08.americas.cpqcorp.net>
To: <www-tag@w3.org>
Cc: "Chris Lilley" <chris@w3.org>, "Daniel Dardailler" <danield@w3.org>, "Thomas Roessler" <tlr@w3.org>

I would agree this isn't a great implementation.  I don't mind the idea
however.  

My biggest concern is that .com, .net, .mobi etc.. All pretty much act
in a consistent manor.  Having a .tel acting differently seems to break
the model pretty badly.

Maybe a URI scheme would be more appropriate?  Tel:\\en.us.Hertz.com

-----Original Message-----
From: www-tag-request@w3.org [mailto:www-tag-request@w3.org] On Behalf
Of Dan Connolly
Sent: Tuesday, May 16, 2006 12:18 PM
To: www-tag@w3.org
Cc: Chris Lilley; Daniel Dardailler; Thomas Roessler
Subject: dot tel - a new TLD


[[
The idea here is to use a Web address that ends in .tel as one would use
a telephone number. Steering a Web browser towards www.hertz.tel, for
example, would activate an Internet phone call to someone at Hertz.
]]

 -- 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?

I think the TAG was pretty clear on this before...
[[
Introducing new TLDs has two effects.

The first effect is a little like printing more money. The value of
one's original registration drops. At the same time, the cost of
protecting one's brand goes up (from the cost of three domains to four,
five, ...).

The value of each domain name such as example.com also drops because of
brand dilution and public confusion.
]]

http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/TLD
<- http://www.w3.org/2004/05/14-tag-summary#tld2


I wonder if we missed a public comment period. The list of comment
forums includes both .mobi and .tel
  http://www.icann.org/tlds/stld-apps-19mar04/stld-public-comments.htm

I think we commentedon .mobi on the record, but I can't find it in their
archive. Odd.

I'm having trouble finding out exactly what decision the
15 May news item is reporting on. Thomas, Daniel, do you know?


--
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541  0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E
Received on Friday, 19 May 2006 16:09:42 GMT

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