W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > October 2005

Re: Semantic Web gTLDs

From: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 07 Oct 2005 10:46:06 -0400
To: muguet@ensta.fr
Cc: semantic-web at W3C <semantic-web@w3c.org>
Message-Id: <20051007144608.4E7BA4EEB6@homer.w3.org>


> We enforce trust in creating gTLDs whereby by contract, people
> agree to obey certain rules. If they don't, they are kicked off the
> SWgTLDs without having the right to complain and or to sue.
> Nobody force them to be in a SWgTLD, it is a voluntary choice,
> and no physical property is destroyed or people hurt.
> In fact, since a site can be accessed through several domain names
> ( very easy with Vhosts ), it might be even required that
> an entity that applies for a SWgTLD, should have also a
> traditionnal gTLD to refer the same site, in order to not bear the=20
> responsibility to make a site unaccessible to all.

Would this be any different, functionally, from having a whitelist?
Someone could run an organization, "The Semantic Web Site
Certification Authority" or some such, and the organization would
provide (on a website, of course) a list of all certified URLs.

I guess the difference is in branding and momentum -- if you can get a
gTLD that would focus attention on the organization, and focus is
important for an effort like this.  I suggest that if you want to
proceed with this plan, you start off with the whitelist approach, and
once you have a proven track record, then perhaps you apply for a
gTLD.  (I'm not endorsing or not-endorsing the gTLD approach, just
suggesting an easier way to take some initial steps that don't require
convincing the community of anything.)

     -- sandro
Received on Friday, 7 October 2005 14:46:22 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:47:06 UTC