I just checked the rules. There are no requirements for the organization type that can hold ".org.uk" or ".co.uk" domain. I guess that putting rules in place might be problematic as many Museums are "companies Limited By Guarantee", yet there are companies limited by guarantee that seem to "trade". Dave Wade > -----Original Message----- > From: Museums Computer Group [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf > Of Jeremy Ottevanger > Sent: 04 December 2015 10:02 > To: [log in to unmask] > Subject: Re: Non-standard domain suffixes > > ".co.uk has always felt "for profit company" versus "fluffy not for profit" > .org.uk ... but I know that's not a rule." > > I think actually that with .org.uk that sort of is a rule. Perhaps fluffy is not > obligatory but IIRC Nominet to have some requirements for you to hold a > .org.uk domain. The same is not the case with .org - no-one enforces any > non-commercial status for these. Perhaps in the same way that no-one > checks that companies with a .com have any commercial sense. > > I suppose I think about this stuff more than the average person, but your > hierarchy is probably about right. That said, it's probably a lot less important > than the story the site itself tells. > > Cheers, Jeremy > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Museums Computer Group [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf > Of James Grimster > Sent: 04 December 2015 09:46 > To: [log in to unmask] > Subject: Re: [MCG] Non-standard domain suffixes > > "I think this would be fascinating to test against the typical audience for any > given site" > > I'd love to know if anyone has done this and published any results; right now > I've two new projects where we are discussing just this. Do we go "the > whole hog" and do a fully SSL subdomain of a local authority domain, i.e. > https://archives.council.gov.uk which feels the most "trusted" , but might be > overkill - we are also debating .co.uk or .org.uk as the primary domain. > .co.uk has always felt "for profit company" versus "fluffy not for profit" > .org.uk ... but I know that's not a rule. > > as a member of the public, which would you trust most to least ... .gov.uk > > .org.uk > .co.uk ? > > cheers > > -- > James > > > > On 3 Dec 2015, at 17:25, James Morley wrote: > > > "At least with .org or .org.uk there's some sort of feeling that it's > > a nice philanthropic organisation trying to do good" > > > > I think this would be fascinating to test against the typical audience > > for any given site, just as it would also be to test a .com tld and > > any possible negative perceptions that might elicit. If tld actually > > has any impact at all! > > > > My overall view though is that any bespoke/niche urls must make 100% > > sense, so if you're thinking a random organisational acronym and > > .pictures then forget it. Unless of course you're the BBC, in which > > case I'd grab it (from what I can see bbc.pictures is still free, > > which has some interesting SEO possibilities, but maybe don't google > > that one!) > > > > --- > > James Morley > > Work: labs.europeana.eu / [log in to unmask] > > Personal: www.jamesmorley.net / @jamesinealing > > Also: www.whatsthatpicture.com / @PhotosOfThePast > > > > On 2 December 2015 at 11:14, Annette Haworth > > <[log in to unmask]> > > wrote: > > > >> Mike, > >> my immediate reaction was '.pictures - is that Disney/is it to be > >> trusted/what is it?' > >> > >> At least with .org or .org.uk there's some sort of feeling that it's > >> a nice philanthropic organisation trying to do good and which won't > >> overcharge me so could you lose some trust with a non-standard domain > >> suffix? > >> Annette > >> ________________________________________ > >> From: Museums Computer Group [[log in to unmask]] on behalf of > >> Frankie Roberto [[log in to unmask]] > >> Sent: 02 December 2015 10:52 > >> To: [log in to unmask] > >> Subject: Re: [MCG] Non-standard domain suffixes > >> > >> Mike wrote: > >> > >>> Yes, agree - this though is a new site (so no options for subdomains > >> because there isn't a domain yet...) and what we're trying to figure > >> out is how to take a loooooong organisational name and make it as > >> easy to get to / find / remember / etc as possible.. > >> > >> Does anyone actually type in full domain names any more? I suspect > >> most people either search (given that most browsers have merged the > >> URL & search > >> inputs) or let their browser auto-complete the URL (if they've > >> visited it before). > >> > >> I doubt the domain has any impact on Google ranking, but it might > >> have some marginal affect on click-through from the search engine > >> results pages, as any matching keywords in the domain are highlighted > >> - but that's true regardless of whether the matching words are in the > >> TLD or the domain or sub-domain. > >> > >> A .pictures domain sounds like a fun novelty, if nothing else... :) > >> > >> Frankie > >> > ********************************************************** > ****** > >> website: http://museumscomputergroup.org.uk/ > >> Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/ukmcg > >> Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/museumscomputergroup > >> [un]subscribe: http://museumscomputergroup.org.uk/email-list/ > >> > ********************************************************** > ****** > >> > >> > ********************************************************** > ****** > >> website: http://museumscomputergroup.org.uk/ > >> Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/ukmcg > >> Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/museumscomputergroup > >> [un]subscribe: http://museumscomputergroup.org.uk/email-list/ > >> > ********************************************************** > ****** > >> > > > > > ********************************************************** > ****** > > website: http://museumscomputergroup.org.uk/ > > Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/ukmcg > > Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/museumscomputergroup > > [un]subscribe: http://museumscomputergroup.org.uk/email-list/ > > > ********************************************************** > ****** > > ********************************************************** > ****** > website: http://museumscomputergroup.org.uk/ > Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/ukmcg > Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/museumscomputergroup > [un]subscribe: http://museumscomputergroup.org.uk/email-list/ > ********************************************************** > ****** > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > ------------------------------------------- > This email message has been delivered safely and archived online by > Mimecast. > For more information please visit http://www.mimecast.com > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > ------------------------------------------- > > ********************************************************** > ****** > website: http://museumscomputergroup.org.uk/ > Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/ukmcg > Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/museumscomputergroup > [un]subscribe: http://museumscomputergroup.org.uk/email-list/ > ********************************************************** > ****** **************************************************************** website: http://museumscomputergroup.org.uk/ Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/ukmcg Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/museumscomputergroup [un]subscribe: http://museumscomputergroup.org.uk/email-list/ ****************************************************************