new.net

Fri Mar 9 23:12:30 UTC 2001

Charles Scott <cscott at gaslightmedia.com> writes:

>   If one considers the structure of name useage, from local assumed names
> to registered trademarks by international organizations, the only logical
> conclusion is to move everything to the regional domain structure and
> totally do away with .com .net .org .edu and even .gov! It would seem to
> be the only structure compatible with all scales of naming requirements
> and should make domain related trademark issues a bit cleaner.

That doesn't help at all.  If I have to know that Apple is located in
Cupertino, CA to find their domain ("apple.cupertino.ci.ca.us"), I
might as well use their IP address.  If Joe Apple lives in Cupertino
too, who has a better claim to this domain, Apple Computers or Joe
Apple?  If Apple Records has "apple.newyork.ci.ny.us" and moves to
Cupertino, they have to completely change their domain name, and the
obvious new name conflicts with Apple Computers.

Geographical naming only makes sense for things that are
geographically arranged and never or very rarely move.  National or
multi-national companies are not geographical in nature, and sometimes
move.  People are not geographical in nature, and sometimes move.
Information is not at all geographical in nature and is in constant
motion.  I don't think this scheme works well for much besides
landmarks.  :-)

-----ScottG.