Re: [wg-c] definitions

[Craig Simon <cls@flywheel.com>]

You're right, yours is not in the same class as IODesign's since
registrations in that .web are commodified and offered for sale to the
general public for the purpose of being made visible on the public
Internet.  I'll think on it.

Kent Crispin wrote:
> 
> On Sat, Jul 17, 1999 at 06:14:08PM -0400, Craig Simon wrote:
> > I'd suggest we put aside the value-laden issue of competition and use a
> > more neutral definition for aTLD ...
> 
> Then would you classify my ".kjc", ".tld", ".grs", and ".web" zones
> as aTLDs.  (Yes, I have a .web as well.  Do you wish it to be
> considered in the same class as IODesign's? I'm a little
> uncomfortable in doing that.) It does seem to me that an essential
> characteristic of the alt TLDs is that they are intended to be "real"
> TLDs, in "real" root zones, and not just tests of fun and games.
> 
> But OK.
> 
> --
> Kent Crispin                               "Do good, and you'll be
> kent@songbird.com                           lonesome." -- Mark Twain