W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webarch-comments@w3.org > October to December 2004

Re: KD005 URI ownership

From: Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 15:27:33 -0400
To: public-webarch-comments@w3.org
Cc: Karl Dubost <karl@w3.org>
Message-id: <87vfdbbx3u.fsf@nwalsh.com>
/ Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> was heard to say:
| (Splitting the thread)
| * KD 005
| 2.5 URI ownership
| """One consequence of this approach is the Web's heavy reliance on the  
| central DNS registry."""
| That's short for something which is one of the major issue of the Web.  
| The whole Web relies on something which is dependent on a rented  
| property notion.
| 	- You own a domain name only for a portion of time
| 	- You don't own a domain name for ever.
| 	- A domain name has a cost which makes it inaccessible for many  
| persons in the world.
| 	====> Consequences: URIs are not free!!!! and so not all people can  
| use them and guarantee the ownership.
| In fact, there's no such thing as URI ownership, but more "URI renting"  
| or "URI tenant" for URIs based on domain names.

The question of who "owns" a domain name strikes me as a legal issue more
than an architectural one. The webarch document extolls the virtues of 
URI persistence and explains the notion of ownership, and the rights and
responsibilities that are associated with it, in a way that I think is

Are there any specific changes you would like to suggest to the text?

                                        Be seeing you,

Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> | Everything should be made as simple as
http://nwalsh.com/            | possible, but no simpler.

Received on Friday, 15 October 2004 19:28:03 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:26:48 UTC