Re: [whatwg/url] Define hosts' public suffix and registrable domain. (#391)

weppos commented on this pull request.



> @@ -272,6 +272,93 @@ for further processing.
 U+0020 SPACE, U+0023 (#), U+0025 (%), U+002F (/), U+003A (:), U+003F (?), U+0040 (@), U+005B ([),
 U+005C (\), or U+005D (]).
 
+<p>A <a for=/>host</a>'s <dfn for=host export id=concept-host-public-suffix>public suffix</dfn> is
+the portion of a <a for=/>host</a> which is controlled by a registrar, public or otherwise. To

This is definitely one of the longest outstanding proper definitions that we eventually need to clarify on the PSL project as well, and connected to https://github.com/publicsuffix/publicsuffix.org/issues/12

If we consider only the ICANN section (mistakenly named like that, as it should be IANA), than the definition is probably correct. If we consider also the PRIVATE section, and then the list as a whole, we must come with a better definition of what is effectively that distinguish a suffix from a host.

The "controlled" part is the key. In both cases, the denominator is than an entity has control of a portion (a set of labels) in a host, and determine specific rules on how that portion of the name is operated. Everything beyond (on the left) of that label is basically not under direct control of that entity, and therefore each subzone should be considered independent from the others.

In the case of a registry, the controlled portion is for sure the TLD and perhaps extra lower levels (generally second, something third). In that case, the "registerable" definition potentially apply, as there is a direct assumption that the registrar makes those domain available for registration. Again, this is actually a potential incorrect assumption, as domains that belong to that zone may not be open for registration, but assigned explicitly.

If the "registerable" may potentially fit the registrar use case, it definitely doesn't fit the PRIVATE use case because the suffixes in this section may be there for a variety of reasons. 

However, regardless the use case, the common pattern is that the entity that controls the suffix declares that every subzone beyond that suffix should be considered independent zones potentially managed by different users.

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/whatwg/url/pull/391#discussion_r190905239