Web 2.0 Definition

September 21, 2006

Web 2.0 (O’Reilly Tim definition) – a technique of designing systems that by taking into account network interactions become better the more people use them. Feature of Web 2.0. is the principle of attracting users to the content and multiple alignment of information material. Tim O’Reilly definition needs to be clarified. Speaking of “getting better”, they mean rather “become better”, that is, it usually comes to filling the information, but questions its reliability, accuracy, objectivity are not considered.

In fact, the term «Web 2.0» stands for projects and services, actively develop and improve the users themselves: blogs, wiki, social networks, and so on. D.

The emergence of Web 2.0 names usually associated with article «Tim O’Reilly – What Is Web 2.0» [1] dated September 30, 2005, first published in Russian in the journal “Computerra» (№ 37 (609) and 38 (610) from 14 and 19 October 2005, respectively), and then laid out under the heading “What the …” [2] website “Computerra online». In this article, Tim O’Reilly linked the emergence of a large number of sites, united by some common principles with the general trend of development of the Internet community, and called this phenomenon of Web 2.0, as opposed to the “old” Web 1.0. Despite the fact that the meaning of this term is still the subject of much debate, those researchers who recognize the existence of Web 2.0, some basic aspects of this phenomenon. The first to use the phrase Web 2.0, became publisher O’Reilly Media, specializing in information technology. It happened in 2004. A little later the head of the publishing house of Timothy O’Reilly formulated the principles of the Web 2.0. Since then, the scope of Web 2.0 has expanded, displacing traditional Web-services, known as Web 1.0.

Web 2.0 is not a technology or any particular style Web-design. To determine the appropriate definition of the essence of Web 2.0 as an integrated approach to planning, implementation and support of Web-resources.

Table Of Contents

     1 Criticism
     2 Web Services
     3 AJAX
     4 web syndication
     5 Mash-up
     6 Key labels (tags)
     7 Socialization site
     8 Design
     9 Disadvantages of Web 2.0
     10 Web 2.0 as fiction
     11 See. Also
     12 Notes
     13 Links
     14 References


«Web 2.0» is not a new version of the “World Wide Web”, but only continues to use the technology and the concept of «Web 1.0». Many of the ideas of Web 2.0 have already met in the network, long before there was the term Web 2.0. For example, Amazon.com site allows users to write reviews and guide since its inception in 1995.

Tim Berners-Lee, author and developer of the World Wide Web, the head of the consortium W3C, who heads since 2006 the world’s largest research project on the World Wide Web, called the term Web 2.0 jargon simple:

     “No one knows what it means … If Web 2.0 sites list – it’s your blogs and wikis, then that means” users for users “.. But it’s the same thing as saying – Web exists, that all men were together” [3]

web-20-list-2015According to Evgeny Morozov main meaning of the expression «Web 2.0» with his invention has been shown that the crisis dotcom bubble in 2001 – not the end of the Web, and it’s time to leave the crisis behind and learn from those companies that survived the crash. [4] Web Service
Main article: Web Service

Web services – a program that can be accessed via the Web (ie, protocol HTTP), and the data is exchanged in XML or JSON, using one of the three most common architectural styles of design applications: RPC, SOAP or REST. As a result, the software can use a Web service, instead of independently implement the required functionality (e.g., administered in the form of check mail). Unlike conventional dynamic libraries, this approach has several advantages:

     A Web service is on the company’s servers, which it was created. Therefore, at any time, the user is available for the latest version of the data and it does not have to worry about updates and computing power required to perform the operation.
     Tools for working with HTTP and XML have in any modern programming language, so the web service into a class of platform.

Main article: Ajax

Asynchronous JavaScript and XML – approach to building user interfaces, web applications, in which a web page is not reloaded, and asynchronously loads the desired user data. Using Ajax has become the most popular after Google began to actively use it to create their websites, such as Gmail and Google Maps. Ajax is often considered synonymous with Web 2.0, which is not the case. Web 2.0 is not tied to any single technology or set of technologies, with the same success back in 1998, the possibility of asynchronous page updates already provided Flash 4
Web Syndication

Simultaneous distribution of audio and video on different pages or web-sites, usually using technologies RSS or Atom. The principle is to spread the headlines and links to them (for example, the latest posts, and so on. N.). Initially, this technology was used on news resources and blogs, but gradually expanded the scope of application.

Web mash-up (literal translation – “mixing”) – a service that fully or partially used as a source of information other services, providing the user with new functionality to work. As a result of this service can also become a new source of information for other web mash-up services. In this way a network of interdependent services integrated with each other.

For example, to find a real estate website with integrated Google Maps, the result is a new, more convenient service, with which every user can see at a glance all homes offered for sale on a map [5].
Key labels (tags)

Keywords describing the object in question, or relating it to any category. It’s kind of tags that are assigned to the object to determine its place among other objects. With the concept of labels closely related concept folksonomy – a term which is widely talked in connection with the growth of Web 2.0 services such as Flickr, del.icio.us, and, in the future, Wink.

The emergence and rapid spread of blogs also fits into the concept of Web 2.0, creating a so-called “web of editable» (writable web).

One example of the use of labels for navigation and categorization are the tag cloud.

The ability to mark a document keyword exists [6] and in the language of HTML (Eng. Keywords), but this method has been completely compromised by its wide use in order to search engine spam.
socialization site

The use developments that allow you to create community.

     The concept of socialization of the site can also include the possibility of individual settings of the site and creating personal area (personal files, images, videos, blogs) for the user so that the user could feel its uniqueness.
     Encouragement, support and trust “collective intelligence”.
     In forming the community is very important competitive element Karma Karma or that allow the community to self-regulate and set additional targets users online presence.

Question book-4.svg
This section is missing references to information sources.
The information must be verifiable, otherwise it may be questioned and removed.
You can edit this article by adding citations to reliable sources.
This mark established March 1, 2012.

The concept of Web 2.0 is also reflected in the design. Preferred steel roundness, imitation convex surfaces, imitation reflections in the manner of glossy plastic modern hi-end devices (eg, iPods). In general, the perception of the appearance to the eye seems to be more pleasant. Graphics such sites take up more memory than using ascetic design. Part of this trend is the coincided the release of new versions of operating systems using the above ideas. Along with the graphics in Web 2.0 has been a tendency to significantly increase the size of the font on the importance of content, especially for headings to more clearly express their motley background on graphic design, as well providing textual content more space.

However, the monotony of such sites is clearly and recently the graphic image of a classic design Web 2.0 is obsolete and not creative. This is especially reflected in the current trend of creating informative sites, where the main role is played by the simplicity, elegance, graphic quality and usability.
Disadvantages of Web 2.0

Use of web 2.0 implies a high degree of dependence on third-party services [citation needed 737 days]:

     dependence sites from third-party solutions, the dependence of the quality of service on the quality of the work of many other companies;
     weak adaptation of the current infrastructure to perform complex computational problems in a browser;
     the vulnerability of sensitive data stored on foreign servers to intruders (known cases of identity theft users of mass hacking accounts blogs);
     serious shortcomings websites web 2.0, which concerns the content of socially significant issues and allowed users under pseudonyms and anonymous, is increasingly becoming a “flooding nonsense” (the English term BS-flooding).

In fact, the era of Web 2.0 site at first glance, interactive and friendly, allows himself to be easily adjusted. However, the collection of statistics about users, their preferences and interests, personal life, career, circle of friends can help the site owner to manipulate the community. According to the most pessimistic forecasts, many Web 2.0 sites, along with other modern technologies provide the prototype of the totalitarian system, “Big Brother.”
Web 2.0 as fiction

The term Web 2.0 is often used for the purpose of advertising as a buzzword or overestimate the actual cost of the project and development of self-worth in the eyes of customers. Different people understand this term very different things. As a result, among the professionals of this term are very skeptical, because it is difficult to find fundamental differences from conventional Web 2.0 sites.

The concept of Web 2.0 was born in a joint brainstorming publishing company O’Reilly Media and MediaLive International [1]. Although web pioneer and O’Reilly Vice President Dale Dougherty (Dale Dougherty) noted that the web is far from collapse, new applications and sites appear more often than mushrooms after a rain, and often simply and quietly die, despite the declared “social” and open Web 2.0, because the main thing in their functioning are not societies, and administrators, that is – a specific person with specific subjective demands and habits.