4 ms·

TLD Applications from the Parent Company of .CO Revealed

• astrodust 14y ago
  Some of these aren't entirely a bad idea, unlike .museum and .aero that were surely peyote inspired. Does anyone know about the parent company's behavior in a general sense? Can't be worse than Verisign, right?
  • duskwuff 14y ago
    For .museum, keep in mind the proposal was written in a world before good search engines, where directories still made sense. (Note that the .museum TLD is highly hierarchical, and every non-"leaf" domain is an index of its contents.) In today's search-driven world, it is, of course, entirely unnecessary. I'd argue that a lot of the more recent TLDs (like .asia, .coop, and .tel) are far more ridiculous.
    • astrodust 14y ago
      Didn't Yahoo! and the Mozilla Directory already prove this was a bad idea long before .museum showed up? Too many expensive experiments in re-inventing history. You're probably right that these are artifacts of an age when domains still mattered, before Google and their like made your brand name far more important.
      • duskwuff 14y ago
        Not really. .museum was introduced in 2001 -- and, presumably, took a while to get to that point. I imagine it was at least a few years in the making. Yahoo didn't switch to crawler-based search (based on Inktomi, iirc?) until 2002.
• duskwuff 14y ago
  404?
• arrowgunz 14y ago
  Now who in this world would want to have their domain names something like: amazon.llc or facebook.inc? .com/.net/.org makes a lot of sense. These gTLDs don't. IMHO.