4 ms·
Most of us adjudicate too much value to TLDs. It's an artificially scarce resource and most people here learned about the Internet when these TLDs were even sca
by mixedCase 10y ago
Most of us adjudicate too much value to TLDs. It's an artificially scarce resource and most people here learned about the Internet when these TLDs were even scarcer.
- zokier 10y agoWell, personally I think that most of us adjudicate too little value to TLDs. The point of DNS is to be hierarchical instead of one flat space, so imho all legacy TLDs should have been immediately deprecated the day ccTLDs were introduced, and countries should have been endorsed to maintain second level hierarchy (somewhat like .uk had for some time). But of course that train left the station 30 years ago... in the current landscape I don't mind gTLDs any more than the general mess that is current DNS "hierarchy".
- TorKlingberg 10y agoMany websites are not country specific. They started somewhere and are headquartered somewhere, but it is not something users should need to remember.
- lmm 10y agoUsing the global TLDs for a global site is fine. But I wish there was a rule against using .com/.org/... domains for sites that are restricted to a single country (e.g. a shop that only ships to the USA should be under .us)
- dx034 10y agoThis is the case in nearly all countries except the US. In the UK, nearly all shops will have a .co.uk domain. In Germany .de domains, etc. It's just that .com is believed to be the US equivalent for that, not an international domain. That's also how large sites handle it. Amazon.com will lead you to the US page, not to an international section (e.g. where you could choose where to go).