Re: Structuring the Root

[Owain Vaughan <owain at AXA.CO.UK>]

[snip]

> 1) Country-Codes (CC) are brain-damaged. Any business getting on the
> Internet is, by definition, looking towards INTERNATIONAL markets. Local
> markets are already being served. The whole thrust of Internet business is
> to expand markets beyond what is available locally.

I agree that the businesses are looking towards international markets, but
country codes help here in differentiating between different international
companies with similar names, without some method for differentiation your
argument breaks down.

> There are also ample
> reasons already stated why CC do NOT work. If someone wishes to see
> corroboration, in detail, I can supply this from my archives.
 
In the current form, this may be true, but with some simple additional rules
they can be made to work well (RFC 2240 et seq.)

> 2) Catagories are brain-damaged. In the modern flux of business markets, it
> is quite possible for a corp to want to do business in multiple catagories.
> During the course of time, a corp may abandon one catagory in favor of
> another.

True for businesses, but one must still be able to differentiate between
academic institutions, businesses, governments etc. just don't have different
sub-categories for businesses.

> Both of the above are shown to be inadequate over time.Notice that most of
> the growth is under .COM and .NET, withj some over-flow into .ORG. It is
> this over-flow which should give a REAL STRONG clue that there is something
> wrong with catagory designations.
 
Yes, but that's if we assume COM, NET and ORG to be equivalent. Initially,
there was only supposed to be one for business (COM), but all the good
names have been used, hence the overflow into inappropriate TLDs.
Businesses shouldn't be allowed to use inappropriate TLDs, hence the desire
to link them more closely to their country, state, province of
incorporation.

Owain