The doctrine:domain advises treating domain names as nouns, protecting domain name holders by a variety of means including register domain name variants, using WHOIS privacy and parametrized contracts, and other DNS best practices.
- "Can you easily write the chosen URI on a piece of paper, or can you remember it easily?
- "Can you spell the chosen URI on the phone?"
- "Does the chosen URI give hints about the content of the resource? Will it still make sense if the resource evolves?"
- "Did you choose to locate the URI near the root level of your Web server? Are you certain it is the best location?"
- "Can you see any reason that would force you to move this resource in the future? New resources that would fit better at this location? A re-organisation of your server maybe?"
W3C argues (contradicting itself) both for opaque URIs and also (as noted above) URIs that can be written, remembered, spelled, and gives hints, i.e. one in natural language. This has become TV best practice and radio best practice also, so the doctrine has evolved to better URI axioms that cover many more aspects of naming, and to ECG naming conventions.
When users control names, more sophisticated rulesets are required: Part of the name will be chosen or fixed by experts, for instance, a standard wiki URI may be used with only the suffix chosen by users, i.e. http://domain.tld/wiki/UP_TO_USERS
Aside from such a standard URI, any web service where users affect URIs must adopt some wiki best practice, e.g. adopt Wikipedia names and adopt target categories. A shift to democratic domains or at least troll-friendly wikis tends to follow on these, leading to the need for more sophisticated doctrines supporting the political virtues, and applying more rigorous conventions, e.g. the ECG naming conventions.
This is a self-evident doctrine not seriously debated - once it's pointed out that names are central to control of knowledge, and that there is an active domain market in generics, there tends to be little debate about the idea - except among a few advocates of democratic domains who probably can't even frame their ideal without the example of domains controlled by people with nefarious intentions.
If the above isn't sufficient, extend the tech tree...