On 13/09/12 10:59, Neil J. McRae wrote: >> >"hosting" is a pretty well understood term. > I couldn't disagree more.
Well, I thought it was, so odd that it is not, and not very clever using a clearly misunderstood term in a claim about a web site then. Out of interest, how do others here defined "hosting" when referring to a web site. I really have always understood it to mean the party that actually has the physical "host" used to provide the service on their infrastructure. Is this really not what people generally understand it to mean? If it really does just mean the company that designed the solution, then that changes radically what it means to claim to be "hosting the longon2012 web site". I wonder if London could have "hosted" the olympics by outsourcing the actual venue to Paris?
