Hello,Having met with the people behind the Telnic
application I can only support their idea and believe in its future.
However, I
want to highlight the fact that a naming scheme is usable for both devices and services.
Thousands of voice services (IVR and more recently voice portals) have proliferated
around the world. The Telnic initiave will finally give us an easy way to access
those!
Let's take the example of a voice portal with 50 services. Each could be
identified by its unique .tel name, such as stockquotes.tel. By saying the name of
service instead of entering on my DTMF keypad a hard to remember number I get access
to the service.
The issue of branding is also addressed that way, the services
are not anonymous, hidden behind a number, anymore. Name clashes can be resolved
by an appropriate advisory boards. I expect voice portals to rush for a massive "land
grab" of .tel names if this scheme is used.
The further benefit of using .tel to
name a service is to allow their seamless networking in the future (using VoIP or
IN call transfers). What's the value of a voice portal if you can't access other
voice portals from it? Creating a network of voice portals requires a coherent naming
scheme - enters Telnic!
If you want to share similar thoughts with me, feel free
to send me an Email at sergejf@yahoo.com.
Regards,
Serge