RE: [wg-c] Re: nine principles for domain names

["Paul Stahura" <stahura@enom.com>]

I agree that the applicant registry proposes 
 a gTLD and explains what they envisage for that gTLD

Paul Stahura
eNom, Inc.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Philip Sheppard [mailto:philip.sheppard@aim.be]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2000 12:25 AM
> To: wg-c@dnso.org
> Subject: Re: [wg-c] Re: nine principles for domain names
> 
> 
> The tired set of domain names .firm   .shop   .web   .arts   
> .rec   .info
> .nom might indeed make an interesting test-bed for the 
> principles. However,
> we envisage a system whereby the applicant registry proposes 
> a gTLD and
> explains what they envisage for that gTLD. The registry 
> describes the market
> they seek to attract. They describe the value added they are 
> proposing for
> the DNS. Such description should be concise and unburdensome for the
> registry.
> 
> It would also be practical for the applicant registry to 
> demonstrate how its
> putative gTLD complies with the principles. The principles 
> are not designed
> to test a name per se.
> 
> Philip
> 
>