RE: Proposal: new top level domain '.urn' alleviates all need for urn: URIs

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ext Graham Klyne [mailto:gk@ninebynine.org]
> Sent: 07 July, 2003 16:24
> To: Stickler Patrick (NMP/Tampere); uri@w3.org
> Cc: www-rdf-interest@w3.org
> Subject: RE: Proposal: new top level domain '.urn' alleviates all need
> for urn: URIs
> 
> 
> At 15:51 07/07/03 +0300, Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com wrote:
> > > I rather think these are the wrong forums in which to promote
> > > a new top
> > > level domain.  And given the state of Internet politics, I
> > > don't expect to
> > > see this happen anytime soon.
> > >
> > > #g
> > > --
> >
> >
> >
> >I'm sorry you feel that way Graham.
> 
> My apologies if my posting sounded like an objection.
> 
> I didn't mean to imply that I objected to your posting, just 
> that I didn't 
> think discussion on RDF/URI lists would really be productive. 
>  My opinion 
> on this is a small matter, and I suggest we not debate the 
> point -- this 
> message is merely to convey my apology for any appearance of 
> overbearing 
> behaviour, which was not intended.

No problem.

It's probably more relevant to uri@w3.org than www-rdf-interest
and I'll probably exclude the latter in future posts, unless
any topics arise that are particular to RDF.

Your comments about the unlikelyhood of a new top level domain
did get me thinking, and of course there is no actual need for
a new top level domain.

A subdomain of .org would do just fine.

So if there actually is strong opposition to a new, special,
top level domain, the proposal is still just as feasible,
though with simply one extra level in the domain.

Cheers,

Patrick

Received on Monday, 7 July 2003 09:44:18 UTC