I suppose to begin with the question is what is Web 2.0? There are plenty of technical definitions and some will say there is even a stylistic definition. As explained by Tim O'Rielly, Dale Dougherty originally coined the term in 2004 as part of a conference brainstorming session. Now as a concept, Web 2.0 has been with us for somewhere near 4 years, personally I like O'Rielly's compact definition of Web 2.0, it's concise and sums up all the aspects of Web 2.0.
For me the web is like a Swiss army knife, it has so many practical uses from social media to knowledge retrieval, self publishing but above all communication. But the internet has always allowed that I hear you say, what is it then that differentiates the early days of the internet to that of now?
Blogs, micro blogging, social media, web apps, cloud computing, crowd sourcing, mashups, Ajax, wiki's.
For one it's the concept of user contributed content and the ease of contribution. The web has gone from a place where to have website takes special knowledge and content is presented in a single direction manner primarily to hock a product, to a place where we communicate and share ideas. Many websites and web applications now allow us to contribute and add to the content they provide. Not only that they can also allow us to take their output or data, to integrate into our own sites or even create entirely new concepts and applications.
No more is this difference between Web 1.0 and Web 2.0 highlighted than in this task of comparing the social book marking site Delicious and a static HTML page of links. The latter of these two fits well into the concept of Web 1.0: Static information presented on a page with no further interaction or contribution from the user. Delicious on the other hand is a dynamic database driven, user contributed, social bookmarking site. Here users can bookmark sites, adding comments and tags (folksonony) to their bookmarks, then share their lists of sites with other users.
This user contribution and communication. This creation and sharing of knowledge epitomises what is Web 2.0 to me. The more I explore these avenues the more I find how the web is changing the worlds we live in.
So I suppose now the question is not what is Web 2.0, but what will Web 3.0 bring us?
What do you think?
Showing posts with label module 3. Show all posts
Showing posts with label module 3. Show all posts
Friday, January 9, 2009
Wednesday, January 7, 2009
Module 3 - Blogs
What can I say about blogs? Before Net11 I had tried my hand at writing a blog but failed miserably. Now though through "forced blogging" and my learning log for Nett11 I am having a ball!
Blogging is something which I am finding is allowing me to express concepts and ideas to more than just myself or partner or lecturer. By blogging through this unit I am sharing my thoughts with an audience of billions (ok, ok, potentially. Maybe). This instant act of self publication is gratifying and I can now see why blogging has taken the internet like a wildfire.
Now blogging it seems is part of the mainstream. The humble blog is now one of the preferred methods to disseminate information on the internet. From personal opinion to news to political commentary, celebrity gossip, ground breaking technology or reviews of all types; the blogosphere has it all. And it's still growing.
To see how much the blogosphere is growing, check out Technorati's State of the Blogosphere 2008 report; the report presents some really interesting stats regarding blogs and their growth worldwide. Compiled and published since 2004 Technorati has tracked the massive growth and interest in blogging and is considered one of the key authorities in the blogosphere. In fact through Technorati you can find the top 100 blogs in the world. Of course if you want to find out the top 100 Aussie blogs (and no I'm not in it) I would suggest Blogpond as a good starting point.
Not only is blogging a great opportunity to self publish, the idea of starting conversations through comments and the further development of your ideas through this interaction is one of the most powerful aspects of blogging. I love the thrill of the comment and the possible further avenues a readers opinions or thoughts can take my own. It is this social interaction, act of communication I find so powerful. A recent Australian study has also found that this blogging and commenting process can help lead to a more fulfilling social life both online and face to face.
Have I developed a greater understanding of blogs since post number one? I know I have definitely gained a greater understanding of the compulsion to blog. I also now truly realise the power that a blog holds. In fact the mere fact that we are using blogs as part of our course work and for relective processes within our learning is simply amazing.
So it's probably obvious then that my thoughts have changed, how have yours changed over the last five weeks?
Blogging is something which I am finding is allowing me to express concepts and ideas to more than just myself or partner or lecturer. By blogging through this unit I am sharing my thoughts with an audience of billions (ok, ok, potentially. Maybe). This instant act of self publication is gratifying and I can now see why blogging has taken the internet like a wildfire.
Now blogging it seems is part of the mainstream. The humble blog is now one of the preferred methods to disseminate information on the internet. From personal opinion to news to political commentary, celebrity gossip, ground breaking technology or reviews of all types; the blogosphere has it all. And it's still growing.
To see how much the blogosphere is growing, check out Technorati's State of the Blogosphere 2008 report; the report presents some really interesting stats regarding blogs and their growth worldwide. Compiled and published since 2004 Technorati has tracked the massive growth and interest in blogging and is considered one of the key authorities in the blogosphere. In fact through Technorati you can find the top 100 blogs in the world. Of course if you want to find out the top 100 Aussie blogs (and no I'm not in it) I would suggest Blogpond as a good starting point.
Not only is blogging a great opportunity to self publish, the idea of starting conversations through comments and the further development of your ideas through this interaction is one of the most powerful aspects of blogging. I love the thrill of the comment and the possible further avenues a readers opinions or thoughts can take my own. It is this social interaction, act of communication I find so powerful. A recent Australian study has also found that this blogging and commenting process can help lead to a more fulfilling social life both online and face to face.
Have I developed a greater understanding of blogs since post number one? I know I have definitely gained a greater understanding of the compulsion to blog. I also now truly realise the power that a blog holds. In fact the mere fact that we are using blogs as part of our course work and for relective processes within our learning is simply amazing.
So it's probably obvious then that my thoughts have changed, how have yours changed over the last five weeks?
Tuesday, January 6, 2009
Module 3 - Copyright
First of all let me get this out of the way. I used the OUA and Curtin logos on my HTML page. In hindsight, and after a fair bit of research and reading of both the Curtin Copyright Policy and Proceedure and the Curtin Logo Use Proceedure, I have come to the conclusion that I have indeed breached Copyright.
Bugger.
Copyright and Intellectual Property is such a complex and touchy subject. There are so many differing points of view held by so many different people with so many different things at stake, it's hard to find a middle ground, or so it seems with the debate that is constantly going on.
I found it interesting to read the Copyright Website and Curtin's own excellent Copyright at Curtin page. Both gave a good balanced view of what Copyright is and how it is applied with some good guidelines and practical scenarios. A little further reading on the sites also gave me some interesting information about Fair Use, particularly around study which will be very useful indeed. Though all this reading material was good, I was a disappointed the course material didn't contain any reference to Creative Commons as a Copyright instrument.
Creative Commons is a non-profit organisation which publish the Creative Commons License. Originally inspired by the GNU GPL, this license works in tandem with traditional Copyright, the difference is with Creative Commons you have much greater flexibility. In that you can change your Copyright from All Rights Reserved to Some Rights Reserved and the like.
In my mind Creative Commons is the way of the future when it comes to online Copyright, or Copyright of any nature for that matter. I feel that initiatives such as this, and the Open Source software culture, will eventually change the way people look at Copyright and IP in general.
Bugger.
Copyright and Intellectual Property is such a complex and touchy subject. There are so many differing points of view held by so many different people with so many different things at stake, it's hard to find a middle ground, or so it seems with the debate that is constantly going on.
I found it interesting to read the Copyright Website and Curtin's own excellent Copyright at Curtin page. Both gave a good balanced view of what Copyright is and how it is applied with some good guidelines and practical scenarios. A little further reading on the sites also gave me some interesting information about Fair Use, particularly around study which will be very useful indeed. Though all this reading material was good, I was a disappointed the course material didn't contain any reference to Creative Commons as a Copyright instrument.
Creative Commons is a non-profit organisation which publish the Creative Commons License. Originally inspired by the GNU GPL, this license works in tandem with traditional Copyright, the difference is with Creative Commons you have much greater flexibility. In that you can change your Copyright from All Rights Reserved to Some Rights Reserved and the like.
In my mind Creative Commons is the way of the future when it comes to online Copyright, or Copyright of any nature for that matter. I feel that initiatives such as this, and the Open Source software culture, will eventually change the way people look at Copyright and IP in general.
Module 3 - WWW Standards
This current module regarding WWW Standards and usability has thrown up some very interesting reading courtesy of Jakob Nielsen and ultimately raised a few more questions for me.
As tasked, I read through through a large chunk of the related material on Nielsen's website Useit.com and also went trawling through the other recommended readings at Dennis Jerz's site and a good piece at Web Style Guide. While there were a few discrepancies between sites, all concurred on what could be described as the principals for writing on the web. I found that these principles could be broken down into the following points.
* Write scanable text - Use highlighted keywords, bulleted text and meaningful sub-headings.
* Reduce the word count - Reduce the overall words used in your writing.
* One idea per paragraph - Keep your paragraphs simple.
* Use simple langauge - Avoid marketese, write for a broad audience.
* Utilise an inverted pyramid writing style - Conclusion first and then expand from there.
I found Nielsen to come for the internet marketers angle. While I believe his theories and studies still hold some weight, his approach is to that of the conversion of readers and visitors to your site into sales of your product. The question which I feel this raises is: Are these approaches applicable to Web 2.0 social internet, blogs or opinion pieces? Does all web content need to be broken down and made scanable to be successful? If so, I think the web would be a much duller place to visit. Fellow Net11 student Kieth makes some interesting further observations about this point in his own blog.
So yes there are times where having the information scanable is pertinent, and I have taken away some very good tips on making my own writing more readable for the net. Yet still I find that if I have found an interesting and well written piece, it will engage me regardless of if it's chunked down with bullet lists and concise headings. The net is a constant and changing place. Making it more usable is not a bad thing, but at the sake of content, opinion, thought, interaction. That's not the internet I want to experience.
What about you, what kind of internet do you want to experience?
As tasked, I read through through a large chunk of the related material on Nielsen's website Useit.com and also went trawling through the other recommended readings at Dennis Jerz's site and a good piece at Web Style Guide. While there were a few discrepancies between sites, all concurred on what could be described as the principals for writing on the web. I found that these principles could be broken down into the following points.
* Write scanable text - Use highlighted keywords, bulleted text and meaningful sub-headings.
* Reduce the word count - Reduce the overall words used in your writing.
* One idea per paragraph - Keep your paragraphs simple.
* Use simple langauge - Avoid marketese, write for a broad audience.
* Utilise an inverted pyramid writing style - Conclusion first and then expand from there.
I found Nielsen to come for the internet marketers angle. While I believe his theories and studies still hold some weight, his approach is to that of the conversion of readers and visitors to your site into sales of your product. The question which I feel this raises is: Are these approaches applicable to Web 2.0 social internet, blogs or opinion pieces? Does all web content need to be broken down and made scanable to be successful? If so, I think the web would be a much duller place to visit. Fellow Net11 student Kieth makes some interesting further observations about this point in his own blog.
So yes there are times where having the information scanable is pertinent, and I have taken away some very good tips on making my own writing more readable for the net. Yet still I find that if I have found an interesting and well written piece, it will engage me regardless of if it's chunked down with bullet lists and concise headings. The net is a constant and changing place. Making it more usable is not a bad thing, but at the sake of content, opinion, thought, interaction. That's not the internet I want to experience.
What about you, what kind of internet do you want to experience?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
