Any comment on web 2.0

[paul]

Any comment on web 2.0 ? for me it seems table-less layouts, CSS modern design.

[harry]

It is hard to define Web 2.0 but still i think :
the use of Ajax component in websites making it simple for users to create content online such as blogging, digg etc...

Classical defination of web 2.0
Web 2.0 is a collection of services that allow webmasters greater community participation, content syndication, advancements in Web-based user interfaces, and a new breed of Web services that can create an entirely new application platform.

[sanderson]

Given below are some of the principle features of Web 2.0, stated by Tim O’Reilly. These principles will be the core competencies of Web 2.0 companies:
• Services, not packaged software, with cost-effective scalability
• Control over unique, hard-to-recreate data sources that get richer as more people use them
• Trusting users as co-developers
• Harnessing collective intelligence
• Leveraging the long tail through customer self-service
• Software above the level of a single device
• Lightweight user interfaces, development models, AND business models

[paul]

Thanks Sanderson, do you have information that currently its complying the W3 standards or they are supposed to set their own standards ?

[kev woodman]

There are no standards for Web 2.0 because it isn't a collection of technologies it's more an outlook or philosophy. If you were being cynical you might say that it was a term invented by Tim O'Reilly to help sell books. But of course I am never cynical.

My definition of Web 2.0 features:

* silly site name;

* logo with a bit of reflection stuck under it;

* big fonts;

*rounded corners;

*no business model.

[sanderson]

Well, everyone has the freedom to make his own defination, go ahead Kev.

Paul, what Kev is saying is the truth - Web 2.0 is not a collection of technologies or standards right now, but surely taking a step towards it.

[paul]

Well, I have just quick look at newnetwatch.com seems they are going to set their own standards though.

[kev woodman]

No No No Web 2.0 is not some sort of movement - it is just a handy term that is used to refer to a particular kind of Web app. There won't be any Web 2.0 standards because there aren't any Web 1.0 standards - there are just standards.

I'm not sure who newnetwatch are Paul but I can't say I thought much of the site - I suspect that their just a bunch of chancers. Stick Web 2.0 on something these days and you can try and surf on the hype.

You can read more at schillmania.com/content/opinion/2005/10/dont-believe-the-web-20-hype/" alistapart.com/articles/web3point0" and russellbeattie.com/notebook/1008838.html. It certainly does not have anything to do with standards, in fact plenty of Web 2.0 sites have been criticised for failing to meet W3C standards, including Google.

[Alex]

Thanks Kev, these sites provide a solid information about the web 1.0 / 2.0 (3.0?) facts.

It will be quite eye-opening to read these kind of articles for the controversial or hearsay information. Thanks.

By the way it will not be a surprising, if someone doubts about this info too.

[paul]

These are criticism not fact, anyway, I found my answer after going through this whole article; oreillynet.com/pub/a/oreilly/tim/news/2005/09/30/what-is-web-20.html?page=5

[kev woodman]

That is the definitive article Paul - personally I think that the problem with a Web 2.0 concept is that the sort of people who bang on about it don't seem to have read Tim O'Reilly's article at all.

[sanderson]

In my previous post, I also mentioned some of the points from Tim's article. However, after reading Alex's comment I am also thinking about, next time if you want to know about the subject, which is very new, then whom to believe.

If rumors only you are going to get in forums or blogs through the search then in near future, people will stay away from these kind of things. Moreover, it will create quite a great damage to the beautiful and decent purpose of these informative tools.

Is there any way to confirm the information you are getting on the net?

[kev woodman]

Simple answer is no Sanders.

You should apply the same standards you would for any research - try to find original sources, use multiple sources and evaluate evidence.

And remember that on the internet nobody knows you're a dog

[sanderson]

lol
Right question to wrong person?

Thanks anyway!

[paul]

Originally Posted by kev woodman

And remember that on the internet nobody knows you're a dog

Internet;
No one owns it.
Everyone can use it.
Anyone can improve it.