Web 2.0 was all about making the web more socially aware, however, was it really a good idea to start a versioning system for the Web?

When Web 2.0 was coined, I got quite excited about it, it was “Yes! this is a new way of thinking, this makes the web more personal”… but I did not thoroughly think through the versioning of the web. Applying 2.0 to the end of the term Web, meant that this is somehow new, somehow better and somehow a superset of what we had before… but it wasn’t, it just clumped pre-existing technologies together under one buzzword which businesses could use.

I fear that this is now happening with the term Web 3.0, which is seen as a swing towards the data. Unfortunately, the term Web 3.0 is being applied as a buzzword already (see the recent post by Paul Krill at InfoWorld titled “Salesforce touts Web 3.0 as platform as a service“, and the post by Simon Wardley titled “3 is the new 2…“).

I say that the Web is the Web, and it will always be the Web… whether it is a Document Web, a Social Web, a Data Web, a Platform Web or an Intelligent Agent Web. When it comes down to it, it will still be the Web, and documents will never be fully replaced by data objects, data objects will never be fully replaced by documents, the social apps won’t replace documents, and intelligent agents won’t replace search engines… things might change slightly, or become slightly more efficient… but essentially it is still the same.

Therefore, I don’t think it is clear when people start versioning the Web… which is why I have started categorising sub-webs, like I have done above. So these Sub-Webs are:

  • Document Web: A Web of Documents with hyperlinks between. This Sub-Web provides a subjective view of information from the context perspective of the author.
  • Social Web: A Web of Socially Aware Applications. This is done in either, or both Document and Linked Data forms. This Sub-Web provides a subjective view of information from the context perspective of the user or group profiled.
  • Linked Data Web: A Web of Data Objects with relationship links between to enhance meaning. This Sub-Web provides an Objective View of information, ready for a contextual perspective of the user.
  • Platform Web: A Web of Services in which you can run Web Applications on - and/or - against. This Sub-Web does not provide a view of information, but is an attempt to provide a distributed network of services capable of providing multiple subjective and objective perspectives.
  • Intelligent Agent Web: A Web of Intelligent Software Agents. It is a Sub-Web because software agents will talk to each other in order to find out information. This Sub-Web communicates internally objectivity and subjectivity depending on the subjective desires of the user.

The important thing is that each of these Sub-Webs does not replace any other kind of Sub-Web. They can be used all together on the Web. No versioning required or desired.

However, this doesn’t mean that new technologies shouldn’t be looked into and implemented. They definitely should be looked into! I am just stating that I don’t believe versioning is the best way of labeling technologies, as it is pretty meaningless when something is not better or improved.

Any thoughts?…

semweb @ 23 June 2008, “No Comments”

Good news for the Semantic Annotator tribe: RDFa is now a candidate recommendation of the W3C “RDFa in XHTML: Syntax and Processing“… which means that RDFa is ready for the mainstream… and actually… RDFa is already being used

Some examples:

  • The London Gazette
  • Digg
  • Various blogs and wikis

If you haven’t checked out RDFa then please do, I was involved with some of the early conversations about RDFa when I was doing my undergraduate project on semantic tagging and annotation.

1995 (and the early 90’s) must have been a visionaries time of dreaming… most of their dreams are happening today.

Watch Steve Jobs (then of NeXT) discuss what he thinks will be popular in 1996 and beyond at OpenStep Days 1995:

  • “The Future of Objects, 3/5″ by Steve Jobs (YouTube Video)
  • “The Future of Objects, 4/5″ by Steve Jobs (YouTube Video)

Heres a spoiler:

  • There is static web document publishing
  • There is dynamic web document publishing
  • People will want to buy things off the web: e-commerce

The thing that OpenStep propose is:

  • WebObjects: an Object Oriented representation of Data available in distributed form over the web

What Steve was suggesting was one of the beginnings of the Data Web! Yep, Portable Distributed Objects and Enterprise Objects Framework was one of the influences of the Semantic Web / Linked Data Web…. not surprising as Tim Berners-Lee designed the initial web stack on a NeXT computer!

I’m going to spend a little time this evening figuring out how much “distributed objects” stuff has been taken from the OpenStep stuff into the Objective-C + Cocoa environment. (<- I guess I must be quite geeky ;-))

OK. It’s a funny title for a blog post, but it is an acronym which I don’t want to start up as a buzzword, but it where I see things going.

A lot of people know about Universal Plug and Play (UPnP), its a set of protocols and formats to allow you to just plug a hardware device into another hardware device and its guaranteed to “just work”. UPnP is all quite low level stuff, which is to be expected because we’re talking about ha