See more Web 2.0 articles on AOD.

Powered by
Share this page on
Article provided by Wikipedia

Main article: "Web API

Web 2.0 often uses machine-based interactions such as "REST and "SOAP. Servers often expose proprietary "Application programming interfaces (API), but standard APIs (for example, for posting to a blog or notifying a blog update) have also come into use. Most communications through APIs involve XML or "JSON payloads. REST APIs, through their use of self-descriptive messages and "hypermedia as the engine of application state, should be self-describing once an entry "URI is known. "Web Services Description Language (WSDL) is the standard way of publishing a SOAP Application programming interface and there are "a range of Web service specifications.


Critics of the term claim that "Web 2.0" does not represent a new version of the "World Wide Web at all, but merely continues to use so-called "Web 1.0" technologies and concepts.[5] First, techniques such as "Ajax do not replace underlying protocols like "HTTP, but add an additional layer of abstraction on top of them. Second, many of the ideas of Web 2.0 were already featured in implementations on networked systems well before the term "Web 2.0" emerged. ", for instance, has allowed users to write reviews and consumer guides since its launch in 1995, in a form of self-publishing. Amazon also opened its API to outside developers in 2002.[52] Previous developments also came from research in "computer-supported collaborative learning and "computer supported cooperative work (CSCW) and from established products like "Lotus Notes and "Lotus Domino, all phenomena that preceded Web 2.0. "Tim Berners-Lee, who developed the initial technologies of the Web, has been an outspoken critic of the term, while supporting many of the elements associated with it.[53] In "the environment where the Web originated, each workstation had a "dedicated IP address and always-on connection to the Internet. Sharing a file or publishing a web page was as simple as moving the file into a shared folder.[54]

Perhaps the most common criticism is that the term is unclear or simply a "buzzword. For many people who work in software, version numbers like 2.0 and 3.0 are for "software versioning or hardware versioning only, and to assign 2.0 arbitrarily to many technologies with a variety of real version numbers has no meaning. The web does not have a version number. For example, in a 2006 interview with "IBM "developerWorks podcast editor Scott Laningham, Tim Berners-Lee described the term "Web 2.0" as a jargon:[5]

"Nobody really knows what it means... If Web 2.0 for you is blogs and wikis, then that is people to people. But that was what the Web was supposed to be all along... Web 2.0, for some people, it means moving some of the thinking [to the] client side, so making it more immediate, but the idea of the Web as interaction between people is really what the Web is. That was what it was designed to be... a collaborative space where people can interact."

Other critics labeled Web 2.0 "a second bubble" (referring to the "Dot-com bubble of 1997–2000), suggesting that too many Web 2.0 companies attempt to develop the same product with a lack of "business models. For example, "The Economist has dubbed the mid- to late-2000s focus on Web companies as "Bubble 2.0".[55]

In terms of Web 2.0's social impact, critics such as "Andrew Keen argue that Web 2.0 has created a cult of digital "narcissism and amateurism, which undermines the notion of expertise by allowing anybody, anywhere to share and place undue value upon their own opinions about any subject and post any kind of content, regardless of their actual talent, knowledge, credentials, biases or possible hidden agendas. Keen's 2007 book, "Cult of the Amateur, argues that the core assumption of Web 2.0, that all opinions and user-generated content are equally valuable and relevant, is misguided. Additionally, "Sunday Times reviewer John Flintoff has characterized Web 2.0 as "creating an endless digital forest of mediocrity: uninformed political commentary, unseemly home videos, embarrassingly amateurish music, unreadable poems, essays and novels... [and that Wikipedia is full of] mistakes, half truths and misunderstandings".[56] In a 1994 "Wired interview, "Steve Jobs, forecasting the future development of the web for personal publishing, said "The Web is great because that person can't foist anything on you - you have to go get it. They can make themselves available, but if nobody wants to look at their site, that's fine. To be honest, most people who have something to say get published now."[57] Michael Gorman, former president of the "American Library Association has been vocal about his opposition to Web 2.0 due to the lack of expertise that it outwardly claims, though he believes that there is hope for the future.[58]

"The task before us is to extend into the digital world the virtues of authenticity, expertise, and scholarly apparatus that have evolved over the 500 years of print, virtues often absent in the manuscript age that preceded print".

There is also a growing body of critique of Web 2.0 from the perspective of "political economy. Since, as Tim O'Reilly and John Batelle put it, Web 2.0 is based on the "customers... building your business for you,"[20] critics have argued that sites such as Google, Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter are exploiting the "free labor"[59] of user-created content.[60] Web 2.0 sites use Terms of Service agreements to claim perpetual licenses to user-generated content, and they use that content to create profiles of users to sell to marketers.[61] This is part of increased surveillance of user activity happening within Web 2.0 sites.[62] Jonathan Zittrain of Harvard's Berkman Center for the Internet and Society argues that such data can be used by governments who want to monitor dissident citizens.[63] The rise of "AJAX-driven web sites where much of the content must be rendered on the client has meant that users of older hardware are given worse performance versus a site purely composed of HTML, where the processing takes place on the server.[64] "Accessibility for disabled or impaired users may also suffer in a Web 2.0 site.[65]


In November 2004, "CMP Media applied to the "USPTO for a "service mark on the use of the term "WEB 2.0" for live events.[66] On the basis of this application, CMP Media sent a "cease-and-desist demand to the Irish non-profit organization IT@Cork on May 24, 2006,[67] but retracted it two days later.[68] The "WEB 2.0" service mark registration passed final PTO Examining Attorney review on May 10, 2006, and was registered on June 27, 2006.[66] The "European Union application (which would confer unambiguous status in Ireland)[69] was declined on May 23, 2007.

See also[edit]

Application domains


  1. ^ a b "Graham, Paul (November 2005). "Web 2.0". Retrieved 2006-08-02. I first heard the phrase 'Web 2.0' in the name of the Web 2.0 conference in 2004. 
  2. ^ a b c d "O'Reilly, Tim (2005-09-30). "What Is Web 2.0". O'Reilly Network. Retrieved 2006-08-06. 
  3. ^ Strickland, Jonathan (2007-12-28). "How Web 2.0 Works". Retrieved 2015-02-28. 
  4. ^ a b DiNucci, Darcy (1999). "Fragmented Future" (PDF). Print. 53 (4): 32. 
  5. ^ a b c "DeveloperWorks Interviews: Tim Berners-Lee". 2006-07-28. Retrieved 2012-08-05. 
  6. ^ "Berners-Lee on the read/write web". BBC News. 2005-08-09. Retrieved 2012-08-05. 
  7. ^ Richardson, Will (2009). Blogs, Wikis, Podcasts, and Other Powerful Web Tools for Classrooms (2nd ed.). California: Corwin Press. p. 1. "ISBN "978-1-4129-5972-8. 
  8. ^ "What is Web 3.0? Webopedia Definition". Retrieved 2017-02-15. 
  9. ^ Berners-Lee, Tim; James Hendler; Ora Lassila (May 17, 2001). "The Semantic Web". Scientific American Magazine. Retrieved March 26, 2008. 
  10. ^ Balachander Krishnamurthy, Graham Cormode (2 June 2008). "Key differences between Web 1.0 and Web 2.0". First Monday. 13 (6). 
  11. ^ "Geocities – Dead media archive". 
  12. ^ "So Long, GeoCities: We Forgot You Still Existed". 
  13. ^ Flew, Terry (2008). New Media: An Introduction (3rd ed.). Melbourne: Oxford University Press. p. 19. 
  14. ^ Viswanathan, Ganesh; Dutt Mathur, Punit; Yammiyavar, Pradeep (March 2010). "From Web 1.0 to Web 2.0 and beyond: Reviewing usability heuristic criteria taking music sites as case studies". IndiaHCI Conference. Mumbai. Retrieved 20 February 2015. 
  15. ^ Web 1.0 defined - How stuff works
  16. ^ "The Right Size of Software". 
  17. ^ "Idehen, Kingsley. 2003. RSS: INJAN (It's not just about news). Blog. Blog Data Space. August 21
  18. ^ "Idehen, Kingsley. 2003. Jeff Bezos Comments about Web Services. Blog. Blog Data Space. September 25.
  19. ^ a b Knorr, Eric. 2003. The year of Web services. CIO, December 15.
  20. ^ a b O'Reilly, Tim, and John Battelle. 2004. Opening Welcome: State of the Internet Industry. In San Francisco, California, October 5.
  21. ^ O’Reilly, T., 2005.
  22. ^ Grossman, Lev. 2006. Person of the Year: You. December 25.
  23. ^ Hinchcliffe, Dion (2006-04-02). "The State of Web 2.0". Web Services. Archived from the original on 2007-05-15. Retrieved 2006-08-06. 
  24. ^ [SSRN: Wireless Communications and Computing at a Crossroads: New Paradigms and Their Impact on Theories Governing the Public's Right to Spectrum Access], Patrick S. Ryan, Journal on Telecommunications & High Technology Law, Vol. 3, No. 2, p. 239, 2005.
  25. ^ "Learn More About Web 2.0". Retrieved 2015-10-14. 
  26. ^ Gerald Marwell and Ruth E. Ames: "Experiments on the Provision of Public Goods. I. Resources, Interest, Group Size, and the Free-Rider Problem". The American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 84, No. 6 (May, 1979), pp. 1335–1360
  27. ^ Best, D., 2006. Web 2.0 Next Big Thing or Next Big Internet Bubble? Lecture Web Information Systems. Techni sche Universiteit Eindhoven.
  28. ^ Greenmeier, Larry & Gaudin, Sharon. "Amid The Rush To Web 2.0, Some Words Of Warning – Web 2.0 – InformationWeek". Retrieved 2008-04-04. 
  29. ^ O’Reilly, T., 2005. What is Web 2.0. Design Patterns and Business Models for the Next Generation of Software, p. 30
  30. ^ "7 Key features of web 2.0". 2012-09-17. Retrieved 2012-09-17. 
  31. ^ "What Is Web 2.0 Design Patterns and Business Models for the Next Generation of Software". 
  32. ^ McAfee, A. (2006). Enterprise 2.0: The Dawn of Emergent Collaboration. MIT Sloan Management review. Vol. 47, No. 3, p. 21–28.
  33. ^ Hinchcliffe, Dion (November 5, 2006). "Web 2.0 definition updated and Enterprise 2.0 emerges". ZDNet blogs. Archived from the original on 2006-11-29. 
  34. ^ Schick, S., 2005. I second that emotion. IT (Canada).
  35. ^ Singer, Jonathan B. (2009). The Role and Regulations for Technology in Social Work Practice and E-Therapy: Social Work 2.0. In A. R. Roberts (Ed). New York, U.S.A.: Oxford University Press. "ISBN "978-0-19-536937-3. 
  36. ^ Breakenridge, D., 2008. PR 2.0: New Media, New Tools, New Audiences 1st ed., FT Press.
  37. ^ "Classroom 2.0". Retrieved 2010-09-22. 
  38. ^ Karp, Scott. "Publishing 2.0". Retrieved 2011-02-06. 
  39. ^ Medicine 2.0
  40. ^ Eggers, William D. (2005). Government 2.0: Using Technology to Improve Education, Cut Red Tape, Reduce Gridlock, and Enhance Democracy. Lanham MD, U.S.A.: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc. "ISBN "978-0-7425-4175-7. 
  41. ^ Rusak, Sergey (2009). Web 2.0 Becoming An Outdated Term. Boston, Massachusetts, U.S.A.: Progressive Advertiser. Archived from the original on March 3, 2010. 
  42. ^ Miller 10–11
  43. ^ "i-Technology Viewpoint: It's Time to Take the Quotation Marks Off "Web 2.0" | Web 2.0 Journal". Retrieved 2011-02-06. 
  44. ^ "Anderson, Paul (2007). "What is Web 2.0? Ideas, technologies and implications for education". JISC Technology and Standards Watch. "CiteSeerX accessible. 
  45. ^ Parise, Salvatore (2008-12-16). "The Secrets of Marketing in a Web 2.0 World". The Wall Street Journal. 
  46. ^ MacManus, Richard (2007). "Mainstream Media Usage of Web 2.0 Services is Increasing". Read Write Web. 
  47. ^ "Banks use Web 2.0 to increase customer retention". PNT Marketing Services. 2010. 
  48. ^ Richardson, Will (2010). Blogs, Wikis, Podcasts, and Other Powerful Web Tools for Classrooms. Corwin Press. p. 171. "ISBN "978-1-4129-7747-0. 
  49. ^ Ladwig, Peter and Kajsa E. Dalrymple, Dominique Brossard, Dietram A. Scheufele and Elizabeth A. Corley (2012). "Perceived familiarity or factual knowledge? Comparing operationalizations of scientific understanding". Science and Public Policy: 761–774. (subscription required (help)). 
  50. ^ "Can eyeOS Succeed Where Failed?". Retrieved 2007-12-12. 
  51. ^ "Tech Beat Hey YouOS! – BusinessWeek". Retrieved 2007-12-12. 
  52. ^ "O'Reilly, Tim (2002-06-18). "Amazon Web Services API". O'Reilly Network. Archived from the original on 2006-06-13. Retrieved 2006-05-27. 
  53. ^ "Tim Berners-Lee on Web 2.0: "nobody even knows what it means"". He's big on blogs and wikis, and has nothing but good things to say about AJAX, but Berners-Lee faults the term "Web 2.0" for lacking any coherent meaning. 
  54. ^ "developerWorks Interviews: Tim Berners-Lee". 
  55. ^ "Bubble 2.0". The Economist. 2005-12-22. Retrieved 2006-12-20. 
  56. ^ Flintoff, JohnPaul (2007-06-03). "Thinking is so over". The Times. London. 
  57. ^ Wolf, Gary. "Steve Jobs: The Next Insanely Great Thing". Wired. 
  58. ^ Gorman, Michael. "Web 2.0: The Sleep of Reason, Part 1". Retrieved 26 April 2011. 
  59. ^ Terranova, Tiziana (2000). "Free Labor: Producing Culture for the Digital Economy". Social Text. 18 (2): 33–58. "doi:10.1215/01642472-18-2_63-33. 
  60. ^ Peterson, Soren (2008). "Loser Generated Content: From Participation to Exploitation". First Monday. 13 (3). 
  61. ^ Gehl, Robert (2011). "The Archive and the Processor: The Internal Logic of Web 2.0". New Media and Society. 13 (8): 1228–1244. "doi:10.1177/1461444811401735. 
  62. ^ Andrejevic, Mark (2007). iSpy: Surveillance and Power in the Interactive Era. Lawrence, KS: U P of Kansas. "ISBN "0-7006-1528-8. 
  63. ^ Zittrain, Jonathan. "Minds for Sale". Berkman Center for the Internet and Society. Retrieved 13 April 2012. 
  64. ^ "Accessibility in Web 2.0 technology". In the Web application domain, making static Web pages accessible is relatively easy. But for Web 2.0 technology, dynamic content and fancy visual effects can make accessibility testing very difficult. 
  65. ^ "Web 2.0 and Accessibility". Archived from the original on 24 August 2014. Web 2.0 applications or websites are often very difficult to control by users with assistive technology. 
  66. ^ a b "USPTO serial number 78322306". Retrieved 2011-02-06. 
  67. ^ "O'Reilly and CMP Exercise Trademark on 'Web 2.0'". Slashdot. 2006-05-26. Retrieved 2006-05-27. 
  68. ^ Torkington, Nathan (2006-05-26). "O'Reilly's coverage of Web 2.0 as a service mark". O'Reilly Radar. Archived from the original on 15 January 2008. Retrieved 2006-06-01. 
  69. ^ "Application number 004972212". 2007. 

External links[edit]

) )