W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > uri@w3.org > June 2001

RE: Proper www usage

From: Ian King <iking@microsoft.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2001 14:06:14 -0700
Message-ID: <8D25F244B8274141B5D313CA4823F39C0235D339@red-msg-06.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
To: "Larry Masinter" <lmnet@attglobal.net>, "Aaron Swartz" <aswartz@swartzfam.com>, "Linda Bellitt (by way of Martin Duerst <duerst@w3.org>)" <linda.bellitt@hunterdouglas.com>, <uri@w3.org>
Agreed, it's a useful convention, as one can infer from minimal
information the type of service that's likely to be available.  For
example (and in the spirit of 2219), if I'm looking for a DNS
"authority" for a given domain, I often seek ns[1].foo.com.  In your
mail, Larry, Outlook displays a working HTTP hyperlink for
www.realbeer.com but not for realbeer.com.  

However, what I DON'T like about it is the onomotopoiea of "double-u
double-u double-u"...  <g>  -- Ian 

-----Original Message-----
From: Larry Masinter [mailto:lmnet@attglobal.net] 
Sent: Monday, June 11, 2001 12:54 PM
To: Ian King; Aaron Swartz; Linda Bellitt (by way of Martin Duerst
<duerst@w3.org>); uri@w3.org
Subject: RE: Proper www usage

> One could think of the "www" node in the same way mail servers are 
> often named "mail.foo.com", nameservers are "dns.foo.com", etc.  It's 
> a convention that got started some time back, but it has no formal 
> basis or meaning.

But RFC 2219 "Use of DNS Aliases for Network Services"
is a Best Current Practice and gives several reasons why distinguishing
between www.realbeer.com and realbeer.com might be a good idea.

Received on Monday, 11 June 2001 19:39:02 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:25:03 UTC