Friday, May 06, 2005


I agree with many of Dan Gillmor's thoughts about web 3.0. The first was the read-only web. It was all about what happened in the browser. Blogging tools drove, I believe, the move to version 2.0 -- the read/write web. Those tools are continuing to be matured. They are cropping up in easier and easier to use content management systems. In applications like flickr and the promised odeo and podshow. All those tools make it easy to publish -- words, pictures, audio -- to the web.

Where I part ways is on Web 3.0. He writes:

And then comes the latest web. This is where it gets really interesting.

The emerging web is one in which the machines talk as much to each other as humans talk to machines or other humans. As the net is the rough equivalent of a computer operating system, we’re learning how to program the web itself.

An operating system offers programmers something called an "applications programming interface," or API. The APIs are essentially shortcuts for programmers who want to use underlying capabilities of the operating system, such as displaying text or printing, and they help products interoperate with each other.

I think that's web 4.0 actually. Until it hits the web-savvy but non-programming user, I don't think we get to announce a version change.

I believe web 3.0 is about structure. It allows the average user to organize on the fly. It puts the tools for site navigation into the hands of the people using the site. I've said before that's what makes me so excited about both flickr and

This movement is why I spend so much time talking about blogging. If we don't get diverse voice on the web -- and right now the diversity I'm concentrating on is nonprofits but other people take a much wider view of diversity -- there will be no diversity built into the structure of the web. The navigational cues will be so culturally specific as to be useless to people who aren't already on the Internet.

(in: web3, folksonomies)