Comments on: On “Web 2.0″

By: Jet

Jet — Tue, 22 Apr 2008 00:22:41 +0000

I’ve been experimenting with various collaboration & document sharing tools and have discovered an excellent site. It is a very user friendly, web-based application that is well worth taking the time to explore. Take a few minutes and look at Projjex.com. The tutorials are excellent & you don’t need to be a Rocket Scientist to figure out how to use it. It even offers a free version so you can try it on for size.

By: Bruce

Bruce — Thu, 07 Sep 2006 19:26:59 +0000

So, you’ve decided to be “Web 2.0″ and abandon accessibility? How does that sit with the faith-based organizations, social welfare organizations and health issues organizations you market your product to, as a matter of interest?

By: Chief Apricot for non-profits

Chief Apricot for non-profits — Thu, 07 Sep 2006 16:40:07 +0000

Good write-up.
The flock yourself blog seem to be gone forever – any idea if there is a new reincarnation?

Accessibility is a big issue for Web 2.0 – actually for all modern web apps. As we are working on our very own Web 2.0 app (Wild Apricot – web software for non-profits, associations etc.) we had to make a decision about accessibility. Unfortunately, we could not afford to make the system backend support all the accessibility standards because it would mean two or three times more coding (not 10% or 25% – and I am NOT exaggerating). Creating interactive AND usable interfaces is very hard – and I do not know if many developers can manage to do it on their own. Development frameworks and browsers have to help too.
By the way – one more significant concern is security. Ajax brings more security problems to the table and a lot of developers do not have the expertise to do anything but slap together some library code – and leave the site totally exposed.

By: bruce

bruce — Thu, 04 May 2006 08:39:40 +0000

I don’t think you understood my article; I’m all for new, interactive pages, and all for community (WordPress, blogger etc have enabled squillions of people to publish, comment and interact without knowing or caring about html, tcl/ip etc). But there’s nothing inherently “2.0″ about community; how long have slashdot, metafilter etc been going? They’re hardly poster children for the “Web 2.0″ crew.

What I object to is the marketing bollocks – in the same way that objecting to the stupidities of 1999 didn’t make you anti-Web, just anti-bullshit.

Slapping a tagcloud, large pastel fonts and some Ajax lovliness on random site x does not indicate a new paradigm. What it does indicate, in the cases I point out above, is bankruptcy of imagination and an anti-Web paradigm.

Locking out people with disabilities because of ill-thoughtout Ajax is not Web 2.0. It’s Web -1.0

By: Fe Line

Fe Line — Thu, 04 May 2006 03:39:14 +0000

Why does everybody automatically assume that “Web 2.0″ is hype? There’s a very reasonable point to be made that the web has changed in the last ten years and so we use a new term to refer to it. Big furry deal.

See for example: http://unwantedinsights.blogspot.com/2006/04/two-point-oh.html

By: Mads Kristensen

Mads Kristensen — Sat, 04 Mar 2006 18:41:31 +0000

I agree with Troels. Get your hands dirty. The learning of Ajax (hijax) isn’t at all different than learning anything else. Just go for it.