Wolfram's proposal sounds completely backward to me. You'd have to consider: does google.data apply to google.org or google.com? Should we have google.org.data and google.com.data?
I think the right way is to put things under the domain. So data.google.com, or google.com/data or even a META tag on a web page that tells the browser the URL for the data relevant to a particular page.
> Wolfram's proposal sounds completely backward to me. You'd have to consider: does google.data apply to google.org or google.com? Should we have google.org.data and google.com.data?
As for that notion, maybe we should switch to naming it such as we do for java packages :D
Google.com would be com.google.search, com.google.mail, etc :P
"I have to say that now I regret that the syntax is so clumsy. I would like http://www.example.com/foo/bar/baz to be just written http:com/example/foo/bar/baz where the client would figure out that www.example.com existed and was the server to contact. But it is too late now."
Comments
Wolfram's proposal sounds completely backward to me. You'd have to consider: does google.data apply to google.org or google.com? Should we have google.org.data and google.com.data?
I think the right way is to put things under the domain. So data.google.com, or google.com/data or even a META tag on a web page that tells the browser the URL for the data relevant to a particular page.
They tried that with ".mobi", while the rest of the world went with "m.".
> Wolfram's proposal sounds completely backward to me.
Yep. Just call it a New Kind of Internet.
Edit: Relevant:
Edit2: Amazon removed the review! Search for "A new kind of review" on this page
http://shell.cas.usf.edu/~wclark/ANKOS_humor.html
> Wolfram's proposal sounds completely backward to me. You'd have to consider: does google.data apply to google.org or google.com? Should we have google.org.data and google.com.data?
As for that notion, maybe we should switch to naming it such as we do for java packages :D
Google.com would be com.google.search, com.google.mail, etc :P
It has crossed TBL's mind:
"I have to say that now I regret that the syntax is so clumsy. I would like http://www.example.com/foo/bar/baz to be just written http:com/example/foo/bar/baz where the client would figure out that www.example.com existed and was the server to contact. But it is too late now."
http://www.w3.org/People/Berners-Lee/FAQ.html#etc