A Web 2.0 website allows users to interact and collaborate with each other through social media dialogue as creators of user-generated content in a virtual community. This contrasts the first generation of Web 1.0-era websites where people were limited to viewing content in a passive manner. Examples of Web 2.0 features include social networking sites or social media sites (e.g., Facebook), blogs, wikis, folksonomies ("tagging" keywords on websites and links), video sharing sites (e.g., YouTube), image sharing sites (e.g., Flickr), hosted services, Web applications ("apps"), collaborative consumption platforms, and mashup applications.
Php Social Network Platform 2.8 Nulled Definition
Web 1.0 is a retronym referring to the first stage of the World Wide Web's evolution, from roughly 1989 to 2004. According to Graham Cormode and Balachander Krishnamurthy, "content creators were few in Web 1.0 with the vast majority of users simply acting as consumers of content".[14] Personal web pages were common, consisting mainly of static pages hosted on ISP-run web servers, or on free web hosting services such as Tripod and the now-defunct GeoCities.[15][16] With Web 2.0, it became common for average web users to have social-networking profiles (on sites such as Myspace and Facebook) and personal blogs (sites like Blogger, Tumblr and LiveJournal) through either a low-cost web hosting service or through a dedicated host. In general, content was generated dynamically, allowing readers to comment directly on pages in a way that was not common previously.[citation needed]
The term Web 2.0 did not resurface until 2002.[22][23][24] Such as Amazon, Facebook, Twitter, and Google, made it easy to con- nect and engage in online transactions. Web 2.0 introduced new features, such as multimedia content and interactive web applications, which mainly consisted of two-dimensional screens.[25] Kinsley and Eric focus on the concepts currently associated with the term where, as Scott Dietzen puts it, "the Web becomes a universal, standards-based integration platform".[24] In 2004, the term began to popularize when O'Reilly Media and MediaLive hosted the first Web 2.0 conference. In their opening remarks, John Battelle and Tim O'Reilly outlined their definition of the "Web as Platform", where software applications are built upon the Web as opposed to upon the desktop. The unique aspect of this migration, they argued, is that "customers are building your business for you".[26] They argued that the activities of users generating content (in the form of ideas, text, videos, or pictures) could be "harnessed" to create value. O'Reilly and Battelle contrasted Web 2.0 with what they called "Web 1.0". They associated this term with the business models of Netscape and the Encyclopædia Britannica Online. For example,
The popularity of Web 2.0 was acknowledged by 2006 TIME magazine Person of The Year (You).[28] That is, TIME selected the masses of users who were participating in content creation on social networks, blogs, wikis, and media sharing sites.
Instead of merely reading a Web 2.0 site, a user is invited to contribute to the site's content by commenting on published articles, or creating a user account or profile on the site, which may enable increased participation. By increasing emphasis on these already-extant capabilities, they encourage users to rely more on their browser for user interface, application software ("apps") and file storage facilities. This has been called "network as platform" computing.[5] Major features of Web 2.0 include social networking websites, self-publishing platforms (e.g., WordPress' easy-to-use blog and website creation tools), "tagging" (which enables users to label websites, videos or photos in some fashion), "like" buttons (which enable a user to indicate that they are pleased by online content), and social bookmarking.
Users can provide the data and exercise some control over what they share on a Web 2.0 site.[5][29] These sites may have an "architecture of participation" that encourages users to add value to the application as they use it.[4][5] Users can add value in many ways, such as uploading their own content on blogs, consumer-evaluation platforms (e.g. Amazon and eBay), news websites (e.g. responding in the comment section), social networking services, media-sharing websites (e.g. YouTube and Instagram) and collaborative-writing projects.[30] Some scholars argue that cloud computing is an example of Web 2.0 because it is simply an implication of computing on the Internet.[31]
A third important part of Web 2.0 is the social web. The social Web consists of a number of online tools and platforms where people share their perspectives, opinions, thoughts and experiences. Web 2.0 applications tend to interact much more with the end user. As such, the end user is not only a user of the application but also a participant by:
The popularity of the term Web 2.0, along with the increasing use of blogs, wikis, and social networking technologies, has led many in academia and business to append a flurry of 2.0's to existing concepts and fields of study,[39] including Library 2.0, Social Work 2.0,[40]Enterprise 2.0, PR 2.0,[41] Classroom 2.0,[42] Publishing 2.0,[43] Medicine 2.0,[44] Telco 2.0, Travel 2.0, Government 2.0,[45] and even Porn 2.0.[46] Many of these 2.0s refer to Web 2.0 technologies as the source of the new version in their respective disciplines and areas. For example, in the Talis white paper "Library 2.0: The Challenge of Disruptive Innovation", Paul Miller argues
Here, Miller links Web 2.0 technologies and the culture of participation that they engender to the field of library science, supporting his claim that there is now a "Library 2.0". Many of the other proponents of new 2.0s mentioned here use similar methods. The meaning of Web 2.0 is role dependent. For example, some use Web 2.0 to establish and maintain relationships through social networks, while some marketing managers might use this promising technology to "end-run traditionally unresponsive I.T. department[s]."[48]
Many regard syndication of site content as a Web 2.0 feature. Syndication uses standardized protocols to permit end-users to make use of a site's data in another context (such as another Web site, a browser plugin, or a separate desktop application). Protocols permitting syndication include RSS (really simple syndication, also known as Web syndication), RDF (as in RSS 1.1), and Atom, all of which are XML-based formats. Observers have started to refer to these technologies as Web feeds. Specialized protocols such as FOAF and XFN (both for social networking) extend the functionality of sites and permit end-users to interact without centralized Web sites.
CakeDC, the commercial entity behind the CakePHP framework, was established by Larry Masters, the founder of CakePHP. CakeDC offers CakePHP development, consultancy, CakePHP training and code review Services. From startups and social networks, to e-commerce and enterprise level applications, CakeDC provides the highest quality CakePHP development available.
Usage of Web 2.0: The social Web contains several online tools and platforms where people share their perspectives, opinions, thoughts, and experiences. Web 2.0 applications tend to interact much more with the end user. As such, the end-user is not only a user of the application but also a participant in these 8 tools mentioned below:
OAuth 2.0 is an industry-standard protocol for authorization. It allows users to give third-party applications access to their resources. You can see a typical example of OAuth 2.0 in action when a user tries to sign up for a third-party app using Google. OAuth 2.0 allows users to give the third-party application access to resources, such as using their profile data on a social network platform, without needing to input their credentials on said application.
For a majority of youth, online social networking sites are their first point of call when they want to find information, including health-related matters [17, 18]. Thus, social media is a rich environment to recruit youth participants to participate in research. For example, recruiting participants from Facebook and Twitter is one of the most effective recruitment strategies in youth-related research studies [19, 20].
In Figure 2, we summarize the ethical aspects and issues to be considered. In the near future, social-media platforms could be reshaped and may be adapted as a tool for health communication among patients and professionals. There are some institutional policies on the use of social media, but no general policies are available yet. Maintaining a respectful and safe environment for patients, the public and physicians should be the main interest for all, researchers, physicians, and commerce. With respect to the patient-physician relationship, it is crucial to balance the information gained through the use of social-media technologies and the possible misuse or misinterpretation of data. Physicians are in principle able to conduct a social-media search for patients to learn more about their behavior or social circumstances. However, it is still unclear how to best use this information in healthcare and how it impacts the patient-physician relationship.
Sensors are a major source of data available on the Web today. While sensor data may be published as mere values, searching, reusing, integrating, and interpreting these data requires more than just the observation results. Of equal importance for the proper interpretation of these values is information about the studied feature of interest, such as a river, the observed property, such as flow velocity, the utilized sampling strategy, such as the specific locations and times at which the velocity was measured, and a variety of other information. OGC's Sensor Web Enablement standards [ OandM], [SensorML] provide a means to annotate sensors and their observations. However, these standards are not integrated and aligned with W3C Semantic Web technologies and Linked Data in particular, which are key drivers for creating and maintaining a global and densely interconnected graph of data. With the rise of the Web of Things and smart cities and homes more generally, actuators and the data they produce also become first-class citizens of the Web. Given their close relation to sensors, observations, procedures, and features of interest, it is desirable to provide a common ontology that also includes actuators and actuation. Finally, with the increasing diversity of data and data providers, definitions such as those for sensors need to be broadened, e.g., to include social sensing. The following specifications introduce the new Semantic Sensor Network (SSN) and Sensor, Observation, Sample, and Actuator (SOSA) ontologies that are set out to provide flexible but coherent perspectives for representing the entities, relations, and activities involved in sensing, sampling, and actuation. SOSA provides a lightweight core for SSN and aims at broadening the target audience and application areas that can make use of Semantic Web ontologies. At the same time, SOSA acts as minimal interoperability fall-back level, i.e., it defines those common classes and properties for which data can be safely exchanged across all uses of SSN, its modules, and SOSA. 2ff7e9595c
Comments