Techmeme is full to bursting with posts announcing/decrying the announcement of something called Web 3.0. The kerfuffle follows an article in the New York Times yesterday, which is actually about semantic technologies — I gave a little overview in August and there’s more here. The ideas have been around since at least 1999,
| ||||
What sort of news journalism might emerge over coming years? Adrian Holovaty predicts the end of some current practices. (Thanks to Rohan Jayasekera for the link). Adrian observes that journalists are conditioned by established practices to always gather information towards an amorphous lump of words called a newspaper story: The problem here is that, for Lunch today with John Davies, who’s in charge of next-web research for BT. It was quite a long, or rather intense, discussion, so I’ll only tackle the basics here. I’ve been trying to nail this semantic web issue for some time, but every time I start reading an academic paper, my attention seems to wander off. I have come to avoid talking about this stuff with people. The first question anyone asks me is “what is Web 2.0?” Unfortunately for the ensuing conversation, it’s a little tricky to provide a straight answer. Every time you find a neat expression for summing the whole Web 2.0 thing up, I immediately think of an exception, or three, Continue reading 10 definitions of Web 2.0 and their shortcomings I’d been hoping to interview Tim O’Reilly since starting work on the book. As the person widely recognised as having coined the expression ‘Web 2.0′, I wanted to know more about what he thought of the way it was all going. He’s a nice guy to talk to, by the way. He’s better humoured, but also grumpier |             | |||
CC-BY-NC-SA 2012 twopointouch - All Rights Reserved |
||||
Recent Comments