Re: More Talk of a a Federalized Web

Isn't that the domain of metadata standards (I believe the TAG is looking at this ATM) and subsequent integration into the semweb? Relying on DNS to handle that sort of thing lends itself to error the second your host, or your data, is offshore. You are also putting an undue expectation on TLD administrators to work closely with work with every state in the world in registering each and every entity in an administration as a TLD. And you also need to account for MoG (machinery of government) changes - what happens when a new administration comes in and splits a department in two?

Don't get me wrong - I'm not saying yours is a bad idea - just that there is a lot to think about in realizing it as a reality.

Prehaps judicious use of the .info domain could be an option? 

A change of business rules could see .info used in a true information sense, reserved for gov or authority (or encyclopedic) use. epa.company.info would make semantic sense for carbon footprint on a company, just as securities.company.info would make sense for corporate registry info.

cheers

Chris Beer (iPhone)
On 06/11/2010, at 11:50, Mike Norton <xsideofparadise@yahoo.com> wrote:

> The thing about Vocabulary Encoding Schemes, it seems to me, is that each governing agency, whether EPA of Health & Human Services or NASA, has its own Scheme, its own vocabulary; to streamline them in a way that allows for data to flow freely within its own unique DNS will enable a much larger, much richer picture of governance at work.  The "clouds" of information to emerge from such a configuration are unimaginable.
>  
> Michael A. Norton
>  
> 
> 
> From: Gannon Dick <gannon_dick@yahoo.com>
> To: Chris Beer <chris@e-beer.net.au>; Mike Norton <xsideofparadise@yahoo.com>
> Cc: Submit to W3C Egov IG <public-egov-ig@w3.org>
> Sent: Fri, November 5, 2010 4:46:54 PM
> Subject: Re: More Talk of a a Federalized Web
> 
> Chris has a point.  There are great, no merely good security advantages to using ccTLD's tied to jurisdiction.  But then, the combination of managers who saw cost efficiencies where there were none (I saved three characters.  NOW it's ready to release!) and people who named their programs "grep" (I was told by a PhD in Computer Science in 2007 that quoting attributes was make work.)  took it's inevitable toll.  Pick your favorite commercial URL and add .us to it and you'll find it doesn't work.  Pick a crook's URL and add .us to it and ... never mind you already did that.
> 
> I'm not totally unsympathetic though Mike.  When I talk about "Federalization" I'm talking about doing away with the need for ad hoc Vocabulary Encoding Schemes which do not translate - they are symbols for symbols.  The question for me is: what rock is that domain tied to.  Inside the Law and Outside the Law is a binary choice.
> 
> --- On Fri, 11/5/10, Mike Norton <xsideofparadise@yahoo.com> wrote:
> 
> From: Mike Norton <xsideofparadise@yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: More Talk of a a Federalized Web
> To: "Chris Beer" <chris@e-beer.net.au>
> Cc: "Gannon Dick" <gannon_dick@yahoo.com>, "Submit to W3C Egov IG" <public-egov-ig@w3.org>
> Date: Friday, November 5, 2010, 4:01 PM
> 
> Good point, Chris.  But just because the web is an international machine of mystery doesn't negate the benefits of having a google.nasa site AND a google.esa site (the latter the Euro Space Agency) - there would be a plethora of new TLD's in this scenario - in the hundreds...and all for great measure!
>  
> IMO :o)
>  
> Michael A. Norton
>  
> 
> 
> From: Chris Beer <chris@e-beer.net.au>
> To: Mike Norton <xsideofparadise@yahoo.com>
> Cc: Gannon Dick <gannon_dick@yahoo.com>; Submit to W3C Egov IG <public-egov-ig@w3.org>
> Sent: Fri, November 5, 2010 1:46:35 PM
> Subject: Re: More Talk of a a Federalized Web
> 
> Federalised would be nice, except the web is international. A better start would be forcing the use of .us for ALL US domains to level the playing field to the standard as written.
> 
> IMO :)
> 
> Chris Beer (iPhone)
> 
> On 06/11/2010, at 3:56, Mike Norton <xsideofparadise@yahoo.com> wrote:
> 
>> On a federalized web, I could go to sirius.fcc, bp.epa, caltech.hhs, microsoft.law, and laidlaw.sec and check, respectively, this company's spectrum purchasing history, that company's conservation efforts, this school's medical record activity, that company's volume of legal data, and this company's public financial statements, and vice versa, while each company's marketing efforts I don't have to worry about, because I'm not at .com, I'm on the federal web! 
>>  
>> Michael A. Norton
>>  
>> 
>> From: Gannon Dick <gannon_dick@yahoo.com>
>> To: Mike Norton <xsideofparadise@yahoo.com>
>> Sent: Wed, November 3, 2010 5:33:47 PM
>> Subject: Re: What if ... A Federalized Web
>> 
>> Outside the US, nobody knows what "FCC" means though ...
>> 
>> Wouldn't that be a problem ?  It would be nice to have a purl.org/usa/gov/xxx forwarding service though.  
>> 
>> --- On Wed, 11/3/10, Mike Norton <xsideofparadise@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> 
>> From: Mike Norton <xsideofparadise@yahoo.com>
>> Subject: Re: What if ... A Federalized Web
>> To: "Gannon Dick" <gannon_dick@yahoo.com>
>> Date: Wednesday, November 3, 2010, 7:21 PM
>> 
>> operative word is "front man" - it would be interesting to be able to to traverse URLs such as google.fcc, nbc.fcc, yahoo.fcc, fox.fcc, etc. while doing the great service that FCC is supposed to provide.   SEO mavericks such as Google itself could then genrate such lists as "Top 10 Most Active FCC Companies" and likewise "Top 10 Most FCC Fined Companies" and Top 100's, etc.
>>  
>> Michael A. Norton
>>  
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
>