The importance of the label "Web 2.0" seems to me because it implies a mind
set, more than a technology set, and it implies that more effectively than
does "semantic web".

I've only been familiar with the term for about 6 weeks, but it seems to me
to imply any approach to building web or web-based services which is
designed to allow for unplanned and possibly unregulated use of the service
by other people.

Simon Grant

On Thu, 23 Mar 2006 11:47:06 -0000, William Hudson (ACM) <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:

>A friend referred me to an article by Tim O'Reilly (of O'Reilly books
>fame) on Web 2.0 in which he is talking a lot about design patterns and
>business models as a way of describing the next generation web
>experience:
>http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/oreilly/tim/news/2005/09/30/what-is-web-
>20.html
>
>How do people feel about this Web 2.0 moniker? Is it useful? Need it be
>as complicated as Tim O'Reilly manages to make it? For example, before
>the more recent use of the term I always thought of Web 2.0 as just the
>semantic web. Could we perhaps just say
>
>Web 2.0 = Semantic web [+ AJAX] ?
>
>What do you think? (And while we're at it, does anyone have a better
>term for AJAX?)

    --------------------------------------------------------------
    Tip of the Day: Use the archives to research common questions
     CHI-WEB: www.sigchi.org/web POSTINGS: mailto:[log in to unmask]
              MODERATORS: mailto:[log in to unmask]
       SUBSCRIPTION CHANGES & FAQ:  www.sigchi.org/web/faq.html
    --------------------------------------------------------------