Comments on: Consolidating domains http://willnorris.com/2008/11/consolidating-domains there's more to life than this Sun, 31 Jul 2011 08:06:56 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4-beta3-20574 By: Will Norris http://willnorris.com/2008/11/consolidating-domains#comment-28054 Will Norris Sat, 03 Jan 2009 00:42:22 +0000 http://willnorris.com/?p=391#comment-28054 <p>@Odin: combination of two plugins, both part of the <a href="http://diso-project.org">DiSo Project</a>:</p> <ul> <li>http://wordpress.org/extend/plugins/extended-profile/</li> <li>http://diso.googlecode.com/svn/wordpress/wp-diso-actionstream/trunk/</li> </ul> @Odin: combination of two plugins, both part of the DiSo Project:

]]> By: Odin Omdal Hørthe http://willnorris.com/2008/11/consolidating-domains#comment-28051 Odin Omdal Hørthe Fri, 02 Jan 2009 19:13:17 +0000 http://willnorris.com/?p=391#comment-28051 <p>I still wonder what you use to make the front page/tumblelog. A self-written WordPress-plugin? A PHP-script?</p> I still wonder what you use to make the front page/tumblelog. A self-written WordPress-plugin? A PHP-script?

]]> By: Will Norris http://willnorris.com/2008/11/consolidating-domains#comment-28047 Will Norris Fri, 02 Jan 2009 17:02:30 +0000 http://willnorris.com/?p=391#comment-28047 <p>@Jilles: huh? OpenID has never depended on TLDs, nor is there any mention of .name in the spec. In fact, OpenID 2.0 doesn't even require DNS-based URLs. I could instead use my i-name, <em>=will.norris</em>, as my OpenID.</p> <p>.name also is not all that new. In fact, it was among the very first set of TLDs created by ICANN back around 2000. It was the first TLD setup specifically for individuals, and makes a lot of sense. In any event, I've already merged the sites, so it doesn't matter at this point.</p> @Jilles: huh? OpenID has never depended on TLDs, nor is there any mention of .name in the spec. In fact, OpenID 2.0 doesn’t even require DNS-based URLs. I could instead use my i-name, =will.norris, as my OpenID.

.name also is not all that new. In fact, it was among the very first set of TLDs created by ICANN back around 2000. It was the first TLD setup specifically for individuals, and makes a lot of sense. In any event, I’ve already merged the sites, so it doesn’t matter at this point.

]]> By: Jilles http://willnorris.com/2008/11/consolidating-domains#comment-28037 Jilles Fri, 02 Jan 2009 08:41:33 +0000 http://willnorris.com/?p=391#comment-28037 <p>I'd say, don't bother with the .name tld. Basically it's just one of the many new TLDs and each new one makes all of the previous ones even less relevant.</p> <p>OpenID shouldn't be depending on TLDs. The decision to put .name in the actual spec was a bad one. If someone invents a .stupidmoron TLD and starts using it, it should just work of course but otherwise just stick with the same identifier you use anyway. For the moment, .com is easier to guess than .name or .tel (a recent addition).</p> I’d say, don’t bother with the .name tld. Basically it’s just one of the many new TLDs and each new one makes all of the previous ones even less relevant.

OpenID shouldn’t be depending on TLDs. The decision to put .name in the actual spec was a bad one. If someone invents a .stupidmoron TLD and starts using it, it should just work of course but otherwise just stick with the same identifier you use anyway. For the moment, .com is easier to guess than .name or .tel (a recent addition).

]]> By: David Collantes http://willnorris.com/2008/11/consolidating-domains#comment-27138 David Collantes Wed, 10 Dec 2008 19:13:50 +0000 http://willnorris.com/?p=391#comment-27138 <p>I vote willnorris.com.</p> I vote willnorris.com.

]]> By: Odin Omdal Hørthe http://willnorris.com/2008/11/consolidating-domains#comment-27088 Odin Omdal Hørthe Tue, 09 Dec 2008 16:13:29 +0000 http://willnorris.com/?p=391#comment-27088 <p>You've got an error in your HTML-code to our links. The rel='nofollow' etc is in the URL... :(</p> <p>And also, rel=nofollow should maybe be turned of when you're not a spammer.</p> You’ve got an error in your HTML-code to our links. The rel=’nofollow’ etc is in the URL… :(

And also, rel=nofollow should maybe be turned of when you’re not a spammer.

]]> By: Odin Omdal Hørthe http://willnorris.com/2008/11/consolidating-domains#comment-27087 Odin Omdal Hørthe Tue, 09 Dec 2008 16:11:41 +0000 http://willnorris.com/?p=391#comment-27087 <p>Sorry to ask, but how did you put together will.norris.name? It looks very cool, a nice tumblelog/personal aggregator or what it is called. :-)</p> Sorry to ask, but how did you put together will.norris.name? It looks very cool, a nice tumblelog/personal aggregator or what it is called. :-)

]]> By: CanyonR http://willnorris.com/2008/11/consolidating-domains#comment-26855 CanyonR Thu, 04 Dec 2008 02:46:48 +0000 http://willnorris.com/?p=391#comment-26855 <p>the .net gTLD, according to the Wikibrain, "was initially intended to be used only for the computers of network providers (such as Internet service providers)".</p> <p>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.net</p> the .net gTLD, according to the Wikibrain, “was initially intended to be used only for the computers of network providers (such as Internet service providers)”.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.net

]]> By: mikeenglish.net/ http://willnorris.com/2008/11/consolidating-domains#comment-26840 mikeenglish.net/ Wed, 03 Dec 2008 19:10:29 +0000 http://willnorris.com/?p=391#comment-26840 <p>While willnorris.name may be more correct, willnorris.com is much less confusing to communicate to the non-tech-savvy user.</p> <p>Since we're talking about it, why is *.net not used more for personal websites? To me, it seems like the perfect compromise, avoiding the confusion of *.name, but not misrepresenting yourself as a commercial entity by using *.com.</p> While willnorris.name may be more correct, willnorris.com is much less confusing to communicate to the non-tech-savvy user.

Since we’re talking about it, why is *.net not used more for personal websites? To me, it seems like the perfect compromise, avoiding the confusion of *.name, but not misrepresenting yourself as a commercial entity by using *.com.

]]> By: CanyonR http://willnorris.com/2008/11/consolidating-domains#comment-26320 CanyonR Sat, 15 Nov 2008 17:57:16 +0000 http://willnorris.com/?p=391#comment-26320 <p>I would put everything onto willnorris.com and start rebuilding the google juice that you would loose. What are you planning on doing with the blog url? I would expect it's either blog. or /blog. Is there any evidence that google prefers one over the other?</p> I would put everything onto willnorris.com and start rebuilding the google juice that you would loose. What are you planning on doing with the blog url? I would expect it’s either blog. or /blog. Is there any evidence that google prefers one over the other?

]]>