Greetings all, This 5-minute video was recently posted on YouTube, by Michael Wesch at Kansas State University, and provides a really cool introduction to Web 2.0. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6gmP4nk0EOE In the run up to the Vancouver abstract deadline I talked with a number of colleagues about Web 2.0 research. Although we seemed to have an implicit agreement on the definition of Web 2.0, based on O’Reilly’s technology / functionality / commercial oriented definition, it appears that a 'formal' definition is still very much in progress. From a research definition perspective, I’m looking forward to the AoIR-8 presentations in Vancouver, where a Web 2.0 definition will surely expand and evolve. From a pedagogical perspective, I will likely use Wesch's video as an introduction into Web 2.0 discussion, and then perhaps supplement it with the O’Reilly piece. http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/oreilly/tim/news/2005/09/30/what-is- web-20.html I’m interested in how others are defining/teaching Web 2.0. Also, does anyone have a favorite reference for Web 2.0? Cheers, Clifford --- Clifford Tatum Doctoral Student Dept. of Communication University of Washington clifford@u.washington.edu
Hi Cliff, air-ls, don't fall for the 2.0 marketing scheme. Besides, we're alrady at 3.0: http://www.web3dot0.org/ CHeers --u ;-) At 14:58 Uhr -0800 11.2.2007, Clifford Tatum wrote:
Greetings all,
This 5-minute video was recently posted on YouTube, by Michael Wesch at Kansas State University, and provides a really cool introduction to Web 2.0.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6gmP4nk0EOE
In the run up to the Vancouver abstract deadline I talked with a number of colleagues about Web 2.0 research. Although we seemed to have an implicit agreement on the definition of Web 2.0, based on O'Reilly's technology / functionality / commercial oriented definition, it appears that a 'formal' definition is still very much in progress.
From a research definition perspective, I'm looking forward to the AoIR-8 presentations in Vancouver, where a Web 2.0 definition will surely expand and evolve.
From a pedagogical perspective, I will likely use Wesch's video as an introduction into Web 2.0 discussion, and then perhaps supplement it with the O'Reilly piece.
http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/oreilly/tim/news/2005/09/30/what-is- web-20.html
I'm interested in how others are defining/teaching Web 2.0. Also, does anyone have a favorite reference for Web 2.0?
Cheers, Clifford
--- Clifford Tatum Doctoral Student Dept. of Communication University of Washington clifford@u.washington.edu
_______________________________________________ The air-l@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
-- PD Dr. Ulf-Dietrich Reips Past President, Society for Computers in Psychology (http://scip.ws) Editor, International Journal of Internet Science (http://www.ijis.net) *new address* Universität Zürich Psychologisches Institut Binzmühlestr. 14/13 8050 Zürich, Switzerland iScience portal (http://psych-iscience.unizh.ch/)
Greetings, For me it depends on what you want to do. From a business perspective the oreilly like definitions are good I think, but from a research/academic perspective they are weakened by their lack of history. I have spent a lot of time critiquing the web2.0 term but at the moment I think it is good at capturing the hype and popularity this use of the web has reached. I see web2.0 as a part of a bigger phenomenon that has been around for many years: social software. I havent got a clear cut one sentence definition of social software, but when talking about this I usually mix stuff like Adrian Mazkenzies Cutting Code, Matthew Fullers Behind the Blip and some of the blogposts by Clay Shirky and Christopher Allen. Looking forward to the AOIR and especially to hear about what people are doing on this. Perhaps we should try and organize a social lunch2.0 for people doing research within this area? Best, Søren Mørk Petersen PS: Clifford, if you get any off list interesting refs. on this I will be very interested, so please mail me.
Greetings all,
This 5-minute video was recently posted on YouTube, by Michael Wesch at Kansas State University, and provides a really cool introduction to Web 2.0.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6gmP4nk0EOE
In the run up to the Vancouver abstract deadline I talked with a number of colleagues about Web 2.0 research. Although we seemed to have an implicit agreement on the definition of Web 2.0, based on OReillys technology / functionality / commercial oriented definition, it appears that a 'formal' definition is still very much in progress.
From a research definition perspective, Im looking forward to the AoIR-8 presentations in Vancouver, where a Web 2.0 definition will surely expand and evolve.
From a pedagogical perspective, I will likely use Wesch's video as an introduction into Web 2.0 discussion, and then perhaps supplement it with the OReilly piece.
http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/oreilly/tim/news/2005/09/30/what-is- web-20.html
Im interested in how others are defining/teaching Web 2.0. Also, does anyone have a favorite reference for Web 2.0?
Cheers, Clifford
--- Clifford Tatum Doctoral Student Dept. of Communication University of Washington clifford@u.washington.edu
_______________________________________________ The air-l@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
participants (3)
-
Clifford Tatum -
smork＠itu.dk -
Ulf-Dietrich Reips