|
Today i was looking around the internet to find something about Web 2.0 Check list. Here i want to tell you about the websites that i found regarding this topic! The first website is msippey.tadalist.com , They say that Web 2.0 Websites need to have these charactristics... - Give us your email address, we'll let you know when it's ready!
- Public beta alpha
- Tags
- Feeds for everything
- Built with Rails
- Sprinkled with Ajax
- Yellow fade
- Blue gradients
- Big icons
- Big fonts
- Big input boxes
- REST API
- Google Maps mashup
- Share with a friend
- TypePad blog for a peek inside the team
- Feature screencasts (thanks, Waxy!)
- Hackathons for new features
- Development wiki
- Business model optimized for the long tail
- It's Free!/AdSense revenue stream
According to this link " http://www.onlamp.com/pub/wlg/9233 " written by Kurt Cagle Web2.0 has the following characteristics: Most Web 2.0 companies that have emerged share a set of ten to twelve similar characteristics: - Mashups. Web 2 applications currently tend to be collisional in nature you throw two or more disparate technologies together and try to determine if there is in fact a market for the resulting product. This often utilizes existing web APIs from one or more disparate providers or applications (Google search information correlated with Google Maps in order to show clustering of behaviors, for information). (Another way of seeing this is that the application developers do not necessarily own all of the pieces of the application).
- Extensive Use of Syndication. Syndication formats (RSS, Atom, etc.) act as a means for both synchronization and notification of services. As these syndication formats become more clearly defined, I expect that they will be used increasingly as the messaging substrate for disparate services, rather than just a syndication format for news readers, but such messaging systems generally are a string indicator of Web 2.0 membership..
- Preferential Use of Open Standards and Open Source. Open and non-proprietary standards are preferred to closed, proprietary ones because they increase interoperability with other systems (not because of licensing issues). Web 2 applications do not have tobe on open source platforms, though this is where the dominant players are at the moment..
- Diversity of Platforms. Web 2.0 applications use common frameworks or environments in order to work in a cross platform environment, and utilize intermediate modules that can be shifted between client and server transparently depending upon the richness of the application. Mobile device strategies are seen as a part of the overall application, rather than as a complete application in and of itself..
- Asynchronous Messaging vs. Synchronous RPCS. Web 2 applications tend to utilize asynchronous messaging at multiple levels, rather than working with synchronous calls. This comes into play with AJAX (which stands for Asynchronous Javascript and XML) as well as distributed services on the server, and has the additional effect of moving the architecture from a client/server one to a distributed network..
- Distributed Documentation/Data. One of the central characteristics of most web 2 applications is the distributed nature of the "user-owned" content data, images, documents, and preferences. This in turn places requirements upon two additional characteristics: Identity management and editability..
- The Editable Web. Once Web 2.0 identity is determined, this opens up the potential for editability of distributed resources. In some cases, this involves the use of stand-alone applications that nonetheless have access to the Internet (at least sporadically). In other cases this is the incorporation of editing capabilities into browsers, a trend that seems to be accelerating.
- Identity Management. Web 2.0 applications place an implicit requirement upon the need to maintain identity of participants across a network, in order to determine ownership, access rights, and editability characteristics. Because such applications are by their nature distributed, identity management moves beyond simple authentication and touches upon preferences management and personalization, as well as visibility of user assets to other users..
- Social Networks. The distributed nature of Web 2.0 applications tend to make them ideal for "social" applications photo-sharing, blogging, podcasting, various and sundry link and reputation enabled systems, all of these are "social" in that they involvethe sharing and meta-tagging of resources among a group of people..
- Metadata Rich. One of the more important aspects of the "media" content within web 2.0 apps is the fact that it usually has extensive metadata associated with it in a variety of forms, from RDF description files to embedded "tags" and micro-formats that provide a separate set of meanings or semantics on HTML code. .
- Community. Community the collection of users, developers and evangelists of a given technology or product has long been a critical part of any software development effort. However, Web 2.0 companies (and projects) in particular are noted for their heavy reliance upon the community in order to both promote the products in question and to provide ancillary extensions, plug-ins or add-ons that enhance the capabilities of the core products. .
- Rich Clients. While not all web 2.0 applications fit in this category, most tend to stretch the bounds of what web clients (browsers and related applications) can do, and are usually designed such that the client takes up a significant share of the state management, presentation generation and data processing. This in turn tends to relieve the server of having to maintain so much of this, simplifying server side code in the process.
Trackback(0)
Copyright 2007. All Rights Reserved.  |
TrackBack URI for this entry
Subscribe to this comment's feed
