In your opinion...
In your opinion...
No such thing, the web does not have numbered versions
In my opinion, web 3.0 is just another means of saying, "nope, thank you very much".
It is just another marketing term that basically says "my web is better than your web because I have web 3.0 and you only have web 1.0". Of course since there has only ever been o0ne version of the web if it does have numbers then everyone only has web 1.0 despite any marketing hype to the contrary.
I never heard of WEB 3.0 until you guys explain it :rolleyes::rolleyes:
Yes well some people sarted using the term "web 2.0" as part of their marketing and so other marketers of course have to go one better with "web 3.0". By next year they'll be referring to "web 50.0" or something around about that.
Here is a good article that explains the semantics of web 3.0 if you want to know the prime components of it.
(this is my first external link i am posting, so if i am not doing it the right way, please let me know)
The whole concept of Web 1, 2 and 3 are buzzwords for changing shifts in perception of how the Internet has evolved. While the web itself does not have numbered versions the buzzwords do help show people with a lack of understanding to how the web has changed over the years so I am not completely against the methodology of virtualising stages of evolution. As for their specific meaning, that is something which differs depending on who you ask, its more of a philosophical and psychological ethos rather than an explicit set of rules and conventions.
Isn't Web 3.0 just a progression of Web 2.0 where there is even more "interaction"?
Pages with simple content are classed as Web 1.0. Those with more focus on interface, graphics and JS are classed as web 2.0. Websites such as Facebook and Twitter, which are practically applications, are generally classed as web 3.0.
Basically, web3.0 is the kind of site that could be right at home in a Prism application.
They talked a bit about this in the last Sitepoint podcast.
A few months ago "web 3.0" was synonymous with the "semantic web". Facebook and Twitter are poster sites for web 2.0. "Web 3" hype was being flamed by Nova Spivack leading up to the launch of Twine, the internet's biggest illegal scraper site, with some semantic analysis tech in the background.
Will Web3.0 sites have shiny reflective logos? :lol:
The third item in any trilogy is always the worst, so I fear Web 3.0
The only meaningful distinction I have seen anyone make with the reference "Web 2" is regarding pages that are more interactive through using Ajax to avoid having to reload the whole page every time that anything needs to be retrieved from the server. Those are the only pages with a significant enough difference from an average web 1 page to be remotely worthy of any distinction. Of course once such pahes started being referred to as web 2 others started using the term for pages with other differences that are too small to notice and some of those decided to go one better by claiming that their microscopic changes were worthy of being considered to be web 3.
As a result just about 99.99% of all this web "followed by a number of your choice" is all marketing hype mainly for sites that (if we are going to number web versions) fall well short of being worthy of being considered to be web 1.