Web 2.0 Essay

1.1 THE SOCIAL READ/WRITE WEB AN INTRODUCTION

We live in age of information where flow of information is changeless and cyberspace dramas an of import function in this flow of information sharing and exchange. The universe is on figure tips due to the promotion in engineerings. All this become possible due to World Wide Web which cause to do Earth as community. Technology and information become disused so rapidly. Now we are in epoch of web 2.0 Harmonizing to Tim Orielly

“ Web 2.0 is the web as platform, crossing all affiliated devices ; Web 2.0 applications are those that make the most of the intrinsic advantages of that platform: delivering package as a continually-updated service that gets better the more people use it, devouring and remixing informations from multiple beginnings, including single users, while supplying their ain informations and services in a signifier that allows remixing by others, making web effects through an ‘architecture of engagement, ‘ and traveling beyond the page metaphor of Web1.0 to present rich user experiences ” ( O’Reilly 2005 ) .

Harmonizing to Alan smith “ 2.0 ” does non demo any specific increase in web version it ‘s merely the manner the usage of web alteration ( ) . Murugesan define Web 2.0 as 2nd stage in the Web ‘s development, which attract IT professionals, concerns, and Web users. Further more he writes that Web 2.0 is wisdom Web, people-centric Web, participative Web, and read/write Web ( Murugesan 2007 ) .

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!


order now

Web 2.0 is ‘people Power ‘ web shows the blogging success, user reappraisal, exposure sharing ( Anderson ) and observe called it gift civilization due to users part as engagement ( Mason, Rennie 2007 ) . In acquisition and learning procedure effectual development of engineering, importance of active engagement, critical thought, societal presence, coaction and two manner communications are besides of import ( Beldarrain 2006 ) .

Web2.0 provides more effectual interaction and coaction, probe for the ways of utilizing web logs efficaciously, wikis, podcasts and societal web which besides used in instruction. The chief feature of these tools called Web 2.0, which shows active engagement from user in the content of creative activity procedure ( Usluel, Mazman 2009 ) .

Web 2.0 societal networking applications, allows users non merely to happen out information about others, but besides to link with others through associating to their profiles, fall ining and making group, and ability to direct public and private messages to their friends for illustration Face book, MySpace, and sharing with them their happy minutes as on Picasa and spark. It has changed the inactive information to more active, dynamic and antiphonal engagement, creative activity and sharing of contents.

On the prejudices of Orielly definition Markus Angermeier created a head map for web 2.0 which explain the cardinal constructs. These of import constructs of Web 2.0 include Usability, Standardization, Design, Remixability, Economy, engagement and convergence.

Serviceability is one of the cardinal factors of web 2.0. Harmonizing to Lewis

“ Web 2.0 applications tend to look more like desktop applications than Web pages: they have simple interfaces with field colorss and no busy forms, Sons, or life. They provide a profusion of Interaction antecedently found merely in desktop applications ” ( Lewis 2006 ) .

He farther compose about the dynamic content of web 2.0 and information assemblage and collection of information on a individual page.

The beginning of information is blogs which are like on-line journals, resource sharing which allow users to portion their favorite web links and other resource like tickets ( Lewis 2006 ) . Example systems include del.icio.us and bibsonomy.org. Web 2.0 fulfils the standardisation demands of ( W3C ) for applications development and content coevals. Design provide rich expression and feel with practical user-interface, oculus catching visual aspect and easiness of usage. Remixability is the installation that Web 2.0 offers where an application can be remixed with different set of other minor applications together to organize a new and more synergistic application.

The debut of Web 2.0 engineerings such as AJAX breaks this fixed page based theoretical account in several ways. Traditional web sites depend on a page update theoretical account where each interaction consequences in an full page refresh Web 2.0 applications allow portion page updates ( Pilgrim, 2008 ) . For illustration, Google Maps do non necessitate an full page to be refreshed when the user selects a preferable position.

Google system gets the information that lies outside of the border of the map in frame with out reviewing whole page and let user to catch the map and drag it without any break ( Zucker 2007 ) . Gmail besides uses AJAX engineering in similar manner to update the small part of page when new electronic mail arrives ( Pilgrim 2008 ) .

1.2 WEB 1.0 VS WEB 2.0

Harmonizing to Musser and O’Reilly ( 2006 )

“ Web 2.0 is a set of economic, societal, and engineering tendencies that jointly form the footing for the following coevals of the Internet-a more mature, typical medium characterised by user engagement, openness, and web effects ” ( Musser, O’Reilly 2008 ) .

The chief difference between Web 1.0 and Web 2.0 is creative activity and presentation of content. In Web 1.0 the bulk of users moving as consumers of content, while in Web 2.0 user can actively take part in content creative activity and sharing and there are assorted engineerings available to make the content to its maximal possible. The free nature of Web 2.0 allow users to make exchange and portion contents of any sort ( text, sound, picture ) and ticket, remark, and link “ Pages “ within group or outside the group. A popular betterment in Web 2.0 is “ mashups, ” which combine or make content in fresh signifiers ( Cormode, Krishnamurthy 2008 ) . For illustration, street references are linked with a map Web site to visualise the locations. This type of site linkage provides installation to make extra nexus between records of any database with other database.

In web 1.0 people implicitly put links of interesting resources to their personal place pages. HTML signifier tickets spread across full web with no installation of tag base browse, hunt engines were utilizing this text as beginning of web page to better the quality of hunt, it limits the tagging in web 1.0 and which restrict collaborative interaction and corporate intelligence of community ( BRIN, PAGE 1998 ) .

While web 2.0 every one can take part in labeling as it become really easy undertaking and go the cardinal feature of portals. “ Due to the big graduated table of the labeling community, portals like del.icio.us have accumulated nice notes in the signifier of tickets for legion resources. These tickets are used for hunt and pilotage and Google AdSenseform easy-to-read sum-ups for the described resources ” ( Kinsella et al. 2008 ) .

Tim O’Reilly in his Article “ What Is Web 2.0: Design Patterns and Business Models for the Following Generation of Software ” , 2005 describe the difference of web1.0 and web2.0 as follows:

Web1.

Web2.0

DoubleClick

Google AdSense

Ofoto

Flickr

Akamai

BitTorrent

mp3.com

Napster

Britannica Online

Wikipedia

personal web sites

blogging

Evite

upcoming.org and EVDB

sphere name speculatio

hunt engine optimisation

page positions

cost per chink

screen grating

Web services

publication

engagement

content direction systems

wikis

directories ( taxonomy )

tagging ( “ folksonomy ” )

stickiness

syndication

( Table 1.0 What is Web 2.0: O’Reilly, 2005 )

Harmonizing to Gibson dynamic updates is one of the of import feature of web2.0 and this is adopted through AJAX engineering ( Gibson 2007 ) . Web2.0 websites respond user petition such as email checking or instant chatting. Web2.0 applications besides provide automatic updates such as stock quotation marks, athleticss tonss and other information ( Gibson 2007 ) . Largely intelligence sites like BBC, Sky News… etc. continuously updating supplying instant information.

Web2.0 encourages the active engagement from the users to entree content and interaction with each other on the Web ( Pilgrim 2008 ) . The content of Web 1.0 was ‘read-only ‘ and inactive. Whereas the transmutation of web to alter the read-only web to ‘read-write ‘ web enabled user active and collaborative engagement.

The above graph shows that how relentless growing in cyberspace use harmonizing to the facts provided by Internet World Stats with in a decennary its usage rise from 361 million to 1650 million users universe broad.

At the early phases content of web were inactive in their nature and they are publish for reading intent there were no interaction between users and user generated content are at ignorable graduated table. As the figure of users raise it alter the manner of content presentation and publication on cyberspace and users start active engagement and engagement in the content and corporate intelligence increased through this societal read/write web. The alteration brought by Web 2.0 in content publication and ingestion obviously shows the divergency between inactive web ( web1.0 ) and dynamic web ( web2.0 ) . Web 2.0 provides pages with dynamic content which non merely can be read by browsers or readers but with the capableness of authorship, join forcesing and sharing cognition at the same clip.

1.3 WEB 2.0 ACTIVITIES AND SERVICES

There are a figure of Web 2.0 services and applications available which provide the foundation of Read/Write web. These tools allow users to make, edit and modify the content of information with coaction. Web 2.0-based communities occupy practical infinites that are unfastened, self-organizing, adaptative, nimble, readily accessible, and easy to utilize ( Sabin, Leone 2009 ) . A Web 2.0 platform has shared design of services to back up a collaborative and distributed environment in which users can link, portion, remark and make new content or package tools ( Sabin, Leone 2009 ) .

Web 2.0 model offers evolutionary services of the Internet history. To be active on cyberspace houses have no pick but to happen out an appropriate function utilizing web2.0. Most major houses, including BMW, IBM, Google, and many others, are positioning them-selves to happen their strategic topographic point, appropriate topographic point and tantrum within these developments ( Wigand, Benjamin & A ; Birkland 2008 ) .

In today ‘s web we find different type of content. Harmonizing to Paul Anderson ( 2007 )

“ These include web logs, wikis, multimedia sharing services, content syndication, podcasting and content tagging services. Many of these applications of Web engineering are comparatively mature, holding been in usage for a figure of old ages, although new characteristics and capablenesss are being added on a regular footing It is deserving observing that many of these newer engineerings are concatenations, i.e. they make usage of bing services ” ( Anderson ) .

In this subdivision I will discourse about some of the of import activities Web 2.0 activities, these are Blogging, Folksonomy and Social Bookmarking, Multimedia Sharing, Social Networking, Podcasting.

1.3.1 BLOGGING

The term web-log, or web log, was coined by Jorn Barger in 1997 and refers to a simple web page dwelling of brief paragraphs of sentiment, information, personal diary entries, or links, called stations, arranged chronologically with the most recent first, in the manner of an on-line diary ( Doctorow et al. , 2002 ) .

Web logs are besides called online journals which enable users, without demand of any proficient accomplishment, to make, publish and form their ain web pages that contain dated content, entries, remarks, treatment etc. in consecutive order ( Alexander, 2006 ; Castenade, 2007 ) .

Peoples can print information which they collect from assorted resources and set up relation between them in web logs. Additionally RSS and the possibility to post remarks do web logs besides a collaborative and social-interactive package application ( Petter et al. , 2005 ) .

San Murugesan defines web logs a two- manner web-base communicating tool. Simply it is a web site which is used to portion ideas and thoughts to go forth suggestions and remarks. An entry in web log might incorporate text, image, or link to other web logs and web pages, and perchance the other media related to the subject. Web logs have ability to bring forth machine clear RSS and Atom feeds it means they could be use to administer machine clear sum-ups of contents and supply the installation of seeking similar information from different beginnings ( Cayzer, 2004 ) , ( Anderson, 2007 ) .

Huge figure of internet users involved in blogging and they are runing in their ain environment. As engineering has become more sophisticated, bloggers have begun to integrate multimedia into their web logs and there are now photo-blogs, video web logs ( vlogs ) , and, progressively, bloggers can upload material straight from their nomadic phones ( Anderson, 2007 ) .There are different types and classs of web logs. Such as Humanistic disciplines, Business, Computers and Technology, Education, Entertainment, Food, History, Law, Libraries, Music, Personal, Political, Regional, Sports and eventually Web.

Blogging package allows three degrees of privateness password-protected most private web log ; user ‘s web log service listed web log most public web log and will be easy found by hunt engines. An unlisted web log neither to the full private nor to the full public. Unlisted web log can non be found without cognizing the URL. It could be public merely if it contain a nexus and person finally click that nexus this manner these web logs picked by hunt engines. Since most web logs contain links that anyone might snap on, unlisted web logs are non secure, although they may stay comparatively unseeable if they link to sites that few people entree and if the links are non activated ( Nardi et al. , 2004 ) .

Blogging is good known activity which used for on-line argument and treatments, shared redaction, personal communicating and networking. In footings of groups, it allows assorted writers or authors to pass on with others to show their positions, sentiments and to compose for squads, groups and group work.

1.3.2 FOLKSONOMY/TAGGING AND SOCIAL BOOKMARKING

A ticket is a keyword that is added to a digital object ( e.g. a web site, image or picture cartridge holder ) to depict it, but non as portion of a formal categorization system. One of the first large-scale applications of tagging was seen with the debut of Joshua Schacter ‘s del.icio.us web site, which launched the ‘social bookmarking ‘ phenomenon ( Anderson, 2007 ) .

In web 2.0 Folksonomy as a societal web service provide installation to users to salvage and organize online their bookmarks with “ societal notes ” or “ tags ” . These are high quality forms of web pages ‘ subjects and good indexs of web users ‘ involvements ( Xu, et al. , 2004 ) .

Social book taging systems portion figure of common characteristics ( Millen et al. , 2005 ) , they besides provide the installation of labeling these bookmarks and unlike traditional browser-base bookmarks they can be belong more that one class. Tagging is far more beyond so web site bookmarking. Servicess like Flicker ( exposure ) , YouTube ( picture ) and Odeo ( podcasts ) allow a assortment of digital artifacts to be socially tagged ( Anderson, 2007 ) . Users contribute non merely in stations and articles but besides in from of tickets which form the metadata of the content which provide valuable information in content hunt. It besides brings benefits of semantic web to current web sites which create collaborative tagging or Folksonomy. Del.icio.us is good illustration of widely accepted and collaboratively created tickets, contend creative activity and blogging ( Subramanya & A ; Liu, 2008 ) .

Social bookmarking systems provide a clear inducement for users to take part ( Farrell et al. , 2007 ) . The thought of tagging has been expanded to include what are called tag clouds: groups of tickets ( tag sets ) from a figure of different users of a tagging service, which collates information about the frequence with which peculiar tickets are used ( Anderson, 2007 ) .

1.3.3 MULTIMEDIA Sharing

Harmonizing to Paul Anderson ( 2007 ) multimedia sharing is one of the biggest growing countries amongst services. Well known illustrations are YouTube which provide picture storage and sharing Flicker for exposure and Odeo for Podcasts. These services provide writable installation which at the same clip makes users as a consumers and originate active engagement and production of web contents. There are million of people take parting in sharing and exchange of these types of media by bring forthing their ain podcasts, pictures and exposures. This development was made possible thorough widespread acceptance of high quality and low cost media engineering. Such as nomadic devices which provide high quality picture capturing and picture taking installation, camcorders with immense storage capableness.

Web 2.0 alteration the manner the user was interacting with old signifier of web which was inactive in nature. Now users of all ages are playing an active function in constructing web contents and this is possible because of low barrier to entry most of so are merely to subscribe up and station content. as the popularity of web site is turning and handiness of broadband is increasing users engagement is besides turning. nowadays cyberspace become portion of life and about every user take portion in content edifice in different signifier like remarks, sentiments, tickets, or in ocular signifier like exposures and pictures. for video sharing most common site is YouTube which provide installations of uploading pictures in different formats like WMV, MPEG and AVI and change over them in Flash Video before posting and it enable users to watch pictures without downloading any excess browser circuit board ( Gill, EL at. , 2007 ) .

1.3.4 SOCIAL NETWORKING

Social networking is one of the services provided by web2.0 which most people utilizing. During last 10 old ages 100s of 1000000s of cyberspace users all over the universe have visited 1000s of societal networking and societal media sites and took advantage of free services in order to remain connected with their online and offline friends, portion user-created contents, such as exposures, pictures, bookmarks, web logs, etc ( Kim, EL at. , 2009 ) .

There are web sites which provide installations to users to make and host these sites. MySpace and Face book each are quieting over 250 million users ( Stone, 2009 ) . YouTube a site for picture sharing is the 3rd most visited site among all web sites, right behind yokel and Google. Barack Obama ‘s election run extensively uses the cyberspace and societal networking sites to acquire his message out ( Talbot, 2008 ; Lagourney, 2008 ) . Even a class on ”Facebook ” is offered in Stanford University, in which pupils are to construct Facebook applications and happen ways to pull users [ Baldwin, 2007 ] .

Chirrup, the societal networking site that features140-character messages, called micro web logs, are so popular in the US that it has spawned such words as chirrup, tweed, and twitterati [ Pogue, 2009 ] . Some one even created an synergistic book, for digital reading devices, that includes text, on-line picture, and Twitter update watercourse [ Stone, 2009 ) . Kindhearted people now use Facebook and Twitter to turn up the proprietors of lost points they find, such as billfolds, nomadic phones, digital cameras, etc. Stone, 2009 ) .

There are many societal networking sites like MySpace, Face Book, Friendster and LinkedIn deriving popularity ( Reston, 2007 ) and go on to pull big figure of people around the Earth ( Bausch & A ; Han, 2006 ) . The turning popularity of societal networking sites influenced academic research, and bookmans they have started to look into the communicating and interaction between people in these sites ( Arjan el at. , 2008 )

1.3.5 PODCASTING

Digital media file largely in mp3 formats distributed on cyberspace for drama back on mp3 participants, iPods and personal computing machines is known as podcasting. Harmonizing to New Media 2006 one-year Horizon Report societal computer science and personal broadcast medium engineerings are emerging e- larning engineerings go forthing big impact on instruction, larning or originative look with in higher instruction ( Long, 2006 ) .

“ Podcasting allows anyone with a mike and an Internet connexion to make audio files that others can download. Vodcasting ( picture on demand broadcast medium ) besides requires some type of picture camera. To make a pod/VOD dramatis personae you need to make the content and print it to a web site. To entree the pod/vodcast you [ can ] subscribe to the content utilizing an “ RSS intelligence reader ” ( besides known as an collector or podcatcher which automatically pulls down podcasts as they are published ) , download the content into content direction package on your computing machine, and so download the file to your MP3 participant by synchronising it with your computing machine. ” ( Herkenhoff, 2006 )

“ The usage of podcasting engineering in museums and similar tourer attractive forces is turn outing interesting. Podcasts are being used as electronic ushers for visitants. Peoples can walk around the attractive force listening to the recording. This gives people the convenience of a guided circuit but with the flexibleness of being able to get down and halt the recording as they wish. It besides means Tourss can be provided to visitants in a broad assortment of foreign linguistic communications. A farther interesting usage is in narratives, such as the BBC ‘s book at bedtime.

These podcasts appeal to a figure of persons for a diverseness of grounds, and there is peculiar involvement from people with sight troubles. Visually impaired persons are now able to bask some of the biggest merchandising novels through this format. ” ( Matthews, 2006 ) Pat R. Ormand describe the benefits of podcast as “ Podcasts can supply extra information for gifted pupils, and support for those with specific larning demands, different acquisition manners, cultural differences, and linguistic communication barriers. Even campus intelligence broadcasts can be podcast ” ( Ormand, 2008 ) .

Podcasts can be used as complementary tool for pupils but they are non the replacing for schoolroom experience where pupils get case feedback and elucidation sing to any inquiry arise related to capable affair.

1.3.6 RECOMMENDATIONS

Internet is the chief beginning of information and sum of information is increasing rabidly and supply user more and more options but at the same clip it is really hard to pull out information which is “ right ” and “ interesting ” signifier this of all time biggest pool ( Aghabozorgi, Wah 2009 ) . To manage with these jobs recommender systems have been introduced ( Resnick & A ; Varian, 1997 ; ( Chung, Sundaram & A ; Srinivasan 2007 ) and defined as the individualized information engineering which is used to foretell a user rating of a peculiar point ( Taghipour, Kardan & A ; Ghidary 2007 ) there are different attacks to make recommender system but most common are “ Collaborative-filtering ” and “ content-based ” ( Shani, Chickering & A ; Meek 2008 ) .

There are 1000s of pages where users publically describe their penchants on different things ( Shani, Chickering & A ; Meek 2008 ) such as films, music participants and CDs etc. Recommendation system is another installation of web 2.0 which show the behavior and penchants of purchasers and is helpful for others to choose merchandises rapidly ( Fleder, Hosanagar 2007 ) purchasers can even see the farther description and relevance between the merchandises.

1.4 TECHNOLOGY AND STANDARDS

At the early phases World Wide Web was inactive in it content and there is no active user interaction ( Wang, Zahadat 2009 ) . The phase of web application we are now is a different epoch of web and these applications are basically different from tradiotional web ( Wang, Zahadat 2009 ) . The thought behind today ‘s web is usability ( Wang, Zahadat 2009 ) . Web 2.0 application provide the installation of expression and feel like desktop applications and supply a rich user interface and interaction capablenesss ( Wang, Zahadat 2009 ) . Web 2.0 offers new agencies of accessing information and sharing cognition and thoughts among others ( Zucker 2007, Wang, Zahadat 2009, Wong, Hong 2008 ) and this all become possible due to “ AJAX ” engineering.

1.4.1 AJAX

As user outlooks on the web start increasing. There was an addition demand to supply applications with profusion of client waiter application without giving the manageableness of web application. A combination of Dynamic HTML, browser side scripting and usage of XML-HTTP protocol has become popular with the name of AJAX ( Crane, D. Pascarello, E. James, D. 2005 ) which provide more synergistic web interface ( N. , Banerjee & A ; Kumar 2009 ) .

AJAX applications change the mode in which beepers are rendered in web browser. Applications are no longer merely aggregation of HTML page that get loaded on petition. AJAX application may dwell on a individual page even it does non necessitate petition to acquire burden it modify its ain presentation dynamically ( N. , Banerjee & A ; Kumar 2009 ) . GUI elements such as bill of fares and button could be implemented utilizing AJAX models ( Kletsch, Volk 2008 ) .One of the primary ends of Ajax execution on Web applications is to better the user ‘s experience of response clip ( Dahlan, Nishimura 2008 ) .

Petreley describe the benefits of AJAX as follows:

“ Ajax truly revolves around a really simple rule. It lets you pull strings the contents of a Web page without holding to recharge the page. Here are the cardinal stairss involved that exploit the power of Ajax:

* Capture an event ( such as when a user changes an edit field or presses a button ) .

* The event triggers JavaScript codification, which sends a question to the Web waiter.

* The JavaScript codification retrieves consequences from the waiter.

* The JavaScript codification uses the consequences to alter the contents of the Web page ” ( Petreley ) .

1.4.2 WEB 2.0 MASHUPS

In past few old ages there is rapid growing in incorporate web applications, known as mashups. Mashup integrates informations, calculation and UI elements provided by several constituents into a individual tool ( Greenshpan, Milo & A ; Polyzotis ) . These mashups are combination of different informations beginnings and APIs into an incorporate terminal user experience ( Zang, Rosson & A ; Nasser 2008 ) . Constructing mashups typically involve programming, although there are now a figure of tools available that simplify even extinguish scheduling for a figure of mashup undertakings and these tools frequently design to turn to different mashup forms ( Wong, Hong 2008 ) .

Harmonizing to Greenshpan EL at.

“ A mashup consists of several smaller constituents, viz. mashlets, implementing specific functionalities. For case, a mashlet may pattern a information beginning, e.g. , a intelligence RSS provender, or it may implement some ocular functionality, e.g. , pull a map, or it may recognize a particular operator, e.g. , extract location information from an RSS provender input. It may besides incorporate logic that “ gums ” together other mashlets, in which instance we refer to it as a gum form ( GP for short ) . As an illustration, a GP may unite the aforesaid three mashlets in order to show a map with the locations of recent intelligence provenders ” ( Greenshpan, Milo & A ; Polyzotis ) .

1.5 WEB 2.0 AND LEARNING

Web 2.0 engineerings in instruction particularly informal larning have shown singular potency ( Safran, Garcia-Barrios & A ; Ebner 2009 ) . Learning through web logs and wikis is playing of import function. Millions of web logs and web log stations available to work out any kind of job at tip of figure. Podcasting is besides playing an of import function in instruction Stanford University, coaction with Apple provide utilizing iTunes supplying online classs in sound and picture format.

Wolfram Alpha a computational cognition engine is another sophisticated illustration of educational web site which

“ contains 10+ trillion pieces of informations, 50,000+ types of algorithms and theoretical accounts, and lingual capablenesss for 1000+ spheres. Built with Mathematica-which is itself the consequence of more than 20 old ages of development at Wolfram Research-Wolfram|Alpha ‘s nucleus codification base now exceeds 5 million lines of symbolic Mathematica codification. Runing on supercomputer-class compute bunchs, Wolfram Alpha makes extended usage of the latest coevals of web and parallel calculating engineerings, including webMathematica and gridMathematica ” ( Wolfram Alpha ) .

The singular intregation and mobility of engineering ( Saljo 2010 ) left an impact on us that how we are believing about schooling and larning. People all around us acquiring assistance of these engineerings, playing complex games, simulate the challenging undertakings, create societal dealingss through societal webs, heighten their professional lives through online larning on their ain footings ( Collins, Halverson 2010, Facer, Sandford 2010 ) .

Chapter Summary

In this chapter, constructs related to Web 2.0 explained and we found that what sweetenings are already being done. What services Web 2.0 is supplying and in what countries they are being used. We besides discussed that what applications are available and how utile they are in constructing user interactive and dynamic design of web sites. Finally we discussed the impact of web 2.0 in instruction. Following chapter will explicate about collaborative acquisition.

Refrences

Wolfram Alpha ( Website. Available: hypertext transfer protocol: //www.wolframalpha.com/ [ 2010, 2/14/2010 ] .

Adebanjo, D. & A ; Michaelides, R. “ Analysis of Web 2.0 enabled e-clusters: A instance survey ” , Technovation, vol. In Press, Corrected Proof.

Aghabozorgi, S.R. & A ; Wah, T.Y. 2009, , pp. 812-818.

Anderson, P. “ What is Web 2.0? Ideas, engineerings and deductions for instruction ” , [ Online ] , vol. 2010, no. 2/13/2010. Available from: hypertext transfer protocol: //www.jisc.ac.uk/media/documents/techwatch/tsw0701b.pdf. [ 2/13/2010 ] .

Arjan, R. , Pfeil, U. & A ; Zaphiris, P. 2008, “ Proceeding of the 26th one-year CHI conference extended abstracts on Human factors in calculating systems – CHI ’08 ; Age differences in on-line societal networking “ , , pp. 2739.

Baldwin, C. 2007, , Forget the classics, seek a Facebook college class | Reuters. Available: hypertext transfer protocol: //www.reuters.com/article/idUSN2741994920070928 [ 2010, 2/13/2010 ] .

Beldarrain, Y. 2006, “ Distance Education Trends: Integrating new engineerings to further pupil interaction and coaction ” , Distance Education, vol. 27, no. 2, pp. 139-153.

Borodin, Y. , Bigham, J.P. , Raman, R. & A ; Ramakrishnan, I.V. 2008, “ Proceedings of the tenth international ACM SIGACCESS conference on Computers and handiness – Assetss ’08 ; What ‘s new? “ , , pp. 145.

BRIN, S. & A ; PAGE, L. 1998, “ The anatomy of a large-scale hypertextual Web hunt engine ” , Computer Networks and ISDN Systems, vol. 30, no. 1-7, pp. 107-117.

Capuano, N. , Pierri, A. , Colace, F. , Gaeta, M. & A ; Mangione, G.R. 2009, “ Proceedings of the first ACM international workshop on Multimedia engineerings for distance larning – MTDL ’09 ; A mash-up authoring tool for e-learning based on pedagogical templets “ , , pp. 87.

Cayzer, S. 2004, “ Semantic blogging and decentralized cognition direction “ , Communications of the ACM, vol. 47, no. 12, pp. 47.

Chung, R. , Sundaram, D. & A ; Srinivasan, A. 2007, “ Integrated personal recommender systems ” , Proceedings of the 9th international conference on Electronic commerceACM, New York, NY, USA, pp. 65.

Collins, A. & A ; Halverson, R. 2010, “ The 2nd educational revolution: rethinking instruction in the age of engineering “ , Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 18-27.

Cormode, G. & A ; Krishnamurthy, B. 2008, “ Cardinal Differences between Web1.0 and Web2.0 ” , First Monday, vol. 13, no. 6.

Crane, D. Pascarello, E. James, D. 2005, Ajax in Action, Manning Publications Co.

Dahlan, A.A. & A ; Nishimura, T. 2008, “ Proceedings of the tenth International Conference on Information Integration and Web-based Applications & A ; Services – iiWAS ’08 ; Implementation of asynchronous prognostic fetch to better the public presentation of Ajax-enabled web applications “ , , pp. 345.

Di Lorenzo, G. , Hacid, H. , Paik, H. & A ; Benatallah, B. 2009, “ Data integrating in mashups “ , ACM SIGMOD Record, vol. 38, no. 1, pp. 59.

Farrell, S. , Lau, T. , Nusser, S. , Wilcox, E. & A ; Muller, M. 2007, “ Proceedings of the twentieth one-year ACM symposium on User interface package and engineering – UIST ’07 ; Socially augmenting employee profiles with people-tagging “ , , pp. 91.

Ferretti, S. , Mirri, S. , Muratori, L.A. , Roccetti, M. & A ; Salomoni, P. 2008, “ Proceedings of the 2008 international cross-disciplinary workshop on Web handiness ( W4A ) – W4A ’08 ; E-learning 2.0 “ , , pp. 116.

Fleder, D.M. & A ; Hosanagar, K. 2007, “ Proceedings of the 8th ACM conference on Electronic commercialism – EC ’07 ; Recommender systems and their impact on gross revenues diverseness “ , , pp. 192.

Gibson, B. 2007, “ Proceedings of the 2007 international cross-disciplinary conference on Web handiness ( W4A ) – W4A ’07 ; Enabling an accessible web 2.0 ” , , pp. 1.

Gill, P. , Arlitt, M. , Li, Z. & A ; Mahanti, A. 2007, “ Proceedings of the 7th ACM SIGCOMM conference on Internet measuring – IMC ’07 ; Youtube traffic word picture “ , , pp. 15.

Gliet, J. , Kruger, A. , Klemm, O. & A ; Schoning, J. 2008, “ Image geo-mashups: the illustration of an augmented world conditions camera. “ , Proceedings of the Working Conference on Advanced Visual interfacesACM, New York, NY, pp. 287.

Greenshpan, O. , Milo, T. & A ; Polyzotis, N. “ Autocompletion for mashups ” , Proceedings of the VLDB Endowment.VLDB Endowment, , pp. 538.

Hartley, R. 2010, “ The development and redefining of a ? ? CALa ? ? : a contemplation on the interplay of theory and pattern “ , Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 4 & lt ; last_page & gt ; 17.

Herkenhoff, L. 2006, “ A trilogy of flexibleness in executive directions plans:

synchronal schoolrooms, podcasts and vodcasts, ” , [ Online ] , , pp.. Available from: hypertext transfer protocol: //download.101com.com/CAM/conf/2006/WPS4.pdf. [ 01/10/2010 ]

Herlocker, J.L. , Konstan, J.A. , Terveen, L.G. & A ; Riedl, J.T. 2004, “ Measuring collaborative filtering recommender systems “ , ACM Transactions on Information Systems, vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 5-53.

Kim, W. , Jeong, O. & A ; Lee, S. 2010, “ On societal Web sites ” , Information Systems, vol. 35, no. 2, pp. 215-236.

Kinsella, S. , Budura, A. , Skobeltsyn, G. , Michel, S. , Breslin, J.G. & A ; Aberer, K. 2008, “ Proceeding of the tenth ACM workshop on Web information and information direction – WIDM ’08 ; From Web 1.0 to Web 2.0 and back – “ , , pp. 79.

Kletsch, C. & A ; Volk, D. 2008, “ Proceedings of the 2008 Conference on Future Play Research, Play, Share – Future Play ’08 ; Towards an AJAX-based game engine “ , , pp. 270.

Lagourney, A. 2008, “ The ‘ 08 run: sea alteration for political relations as we know it ” , .

Lewis, D. 2006, “ What is web 2.0? “ , Crossroads, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 3.

Long, P. 2006, The Horizon Report, New Media Consortium and EDUCAUSE Learning Initiative, Stanford, CA, USA.

Mason, R. & A ; Rennie, F. 2007, “ Using Web 2.0 for larning in the community ” , The Internet and Higher Education, vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 196-203.

Saint matthews, K. 2006, “ Research into podcasting engineering including current and

possible hereafter utilizations ” , [ Online ] , , pp. Available from: hypertext transfer protocol: //mms.ecs.soton.ac.uk/2007/papers/32.pdf. [ 01/10/2010 ]

Millen, D. , Feinberg, J. & A ; Kerr, B. 2005, “ Social bookmarking in the endeavor “ , Queue, vol. 3, no. 9, pp. 28.

Murugesan, S. 2007, “ Understanding Web 2.0 ” , IT Professional, vol. 9, no. 4, pp. 34-41.

Musser, J. & A ; O’Reilly, T. 2008, “ Web 2.0 Report ” , [ Online ] , , pp. 101. Available from: hypertext transfer protocol: //www.oreilly.com/catalog/web2report/chapter/web20_report_excerpt.pdf. [ 01/10/2010 ]

N. , K. , Banerjee, U. & A ; Kumar, S. 2009, “ Proceeding of the 2nd one-year conference on India package technology conference – ISEC ’09 ; Performance optimisation of SOA based AJAX application “ , , pp. 89.

Nardi, B.A. , Schiano, D.J. & A ; Gumbrecht, M. 2004, “ Proceedings of the 2004 ACM conference on Computer supported concerted work – CSCW ’04 ; Blogging as societal activity, or, would you allow 900 million people read your diary? “ , , pp. 222.

O’Reilly, T. 2005, , Web 2.0: Compact Definition? – O’Reilly Radar [ Homepage of O’Reilly Radar ] , [ Online ] . Available: hypertext transfer protocol: //radar.oreilly.com/archives/2005/10/web-20-compact-definition.html [ 2010, 2/13/2010 ] .

Ormond, P.R. 2008, “ Podcasting enhances larning ” , vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 232-238.

Petreley, N. “ Ajax simplified ” , Lnux Journal, vol. 2007, no. 157.

Pilgrim, C.J. 2008, “ Proceedings of the 19th ACM conference on Hypertext and hypermedia – HT ’08 ; Bettering the serviceability of web 2.0 applications “ , , pp. 239.

Plasmeijer, R. , Jansen, J.M. , Koopman, P. & A ; Achten, P. 2008, “ Proceedings of the tenth international ACM SIGPLAN symposium on Principles and pattern of declaratory programming – PPDP ’08 ; Declarative Ajax and client side rating of work flows utilizing iTasks “ , , pp. 56.

Pogue, D. 2009, “ Chirrup? It ‘s what you make it ” , .

Resnick, P. & A ; Varian, H.R. 1997, “ Recommender systems “ , Communications of the ACM, vol. 40, no. 3, pp. 56-58.

Reston, V. 2007, , Social Networking Goes Global – comScore, Inc. Available: hypertext transfer protocol: //www.comscore.com/Press_Events/Press_Releases/2007/07/Social_Networking_Goes_Global [ 2010, 2/13/2010 ] .

Sabin, M. & A ; Leone, J. 2009, “ Proceedings of the tenth ACM conference on SIG-information engineering instruction – SIGITE ’09 ; IT education 2.0 “ , , pp. 91.

Safran, C. , Garcia-Barrios, V.M. & A ; Ebner, M. 2009, “ Proceedings of the 13th International MindTrek Conference: Everyday Life in the Ubiquitous Era on – MindTrek ’09 ; The benefits of Geo-Tagging and microblogging in m-Learning “ , , pp. 135.

Saljo, R. 2010, “ Digital tools and challenges to institutional traditions of acquisition: engineerings, societal memory and the performative nature of larning ” , Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 53-64.

Selwyn, N. 2010, “ Looking beyond acquisition: notes towards the critical survey of educational engineering “ , Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 65-73.

Shani, G. , Chickering, M. & A ; Meek, C. 2008, “ Proceedings of the 2008 ACM conference on Recommender systems – RecSys ’08 ; Mining recommendations from the web “ , , pp. 35.

Siersdorfer, S. & A ; Sizov, S. 2009, “ Proceedings of the twentieth ACM conference on Hypertext and hypermedia – HT ’09 ; Social recommender systems for web 2.0 folksonomies “ , , pp. 261.

Silva, P. A. and Dix, A. 2007, “ Serviceability: non as we know it! “ , 21st British HCI Group Annual Conference on HCI 2008: Peoples and Computers Twenty-ones: Hci..But Not As We Know It British Computer Society Swinton, UK, UK, , pp. 103.

Smith, A. 2009, Web 2.0 and Official Statisticss: The UK Perspective: , Office for the National Statistics, Titchfield, Fareham, Hants, United Kingdom.

Starbek, P. , Erjavec, M.S. & A ; Peklaj, C. 2010, “ Teaching genetic sciences with multimedia consequences in better acquisition of cognition and betterment in comprehension “ , Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, .

Rock, B. 2009, “ Is Facebook turning up excessively fast ” , .

Rock, B. 2009, “ Is this the hereafter of the digital book ” , .

Rock, B. 2009, Lost in the existent universe, found via internet, New York Times.

Subramanya, S.B. & A ; Liu, H. 2008, “ Proceeding of the 2008 ACM workshop on Search in societal media – SSM ’08 ; Socialtagger – collaborative tagging for web logs in the long tail “ , , pp. 19.

Taghipour, N. , Kardan, A. & A ; Ghidary, S.S. 2007, “ Proceedings of the 2007 ACM conference on Recommender systems – RecSys ’07 ; Usage-based web recommendations “ , , pp. 113.

Talbot, D. 2008, , Technology Review: How Obama Truly Did It. Available: hypertext transfer protocol: //www.technologyreview.com/web/21222/ [ 2010, 2/13/2010 ] .

Ullrich, C. , Borau, K. , Luo, H. , Tan, X. , Shen, L. & A ; Shen, R. 2008, “ Proceeding of the 17th international conference on World Wide Web – WWW ’08 ; Why web 2.0 is good for larning and for research “ , , pp. 705.

Usluel, Y.K. & A ; Mazman, S.G. 2009, “ Adoption of Web 2.0 tools in distance instruction ” , International Journal of Human Sciences, .

new wave Wamelen, J. & A ; de Kool, D. 2008, “ Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Theory and Practice of Electronic Governance – ICEGOV ’08 ; Web 2.0 “ , , pp. 349.

Wang, Y.D. & A ; Zahadat, N. 2009, “ Proceedings of the tenth ACM conference on SIG-information engineering instruction – SIGITE ’09 ; Teaching web development in the web 2.0 epoch “ , , pp. 80.

Wigand, R.T. , Benjamin, R.I. & A ; Birkland, J.L.H. 2008, “ Proceedings of the tenth international conference on Electronic commercialism – ICEC ’08 ; Web 2.0 and beyond “ , , pp. 1.

Wong, J. & A ; Hong, J. 2008, “ Proceedings of the 4th international workshop on End-user package technology – WEUSE ’08 ; What do we “ mashup ” when we make mashups? “ , , pp. 35-39.

Xu, S. , Bao, S. , Fei, B. , Su, Z. & A ; Yu, Y. 2008, “ Proceedings of the 31st one-year international ACM SIGIR conference on Research and development in information retrieval – SIGIR ’08 ; Exploring folksonomy for personalized hunt “ , , pp. 155.

Zang, N. , Rosson, M.B. & A ; Nasser, V. 2008, “ Proceeding of the 26th one-year CHI conference extended abstracts on Human factors in calculating systems – CHI ’08 ; Mashups “ , , pp. 3171.

Zhang, M. 2009, “ Proceedings of the 3rd ACM conference on Recommender systems – RecSys ’09 ; Enhancing diverseness in Top-N recommendation “ , , pp. 397.

Zucker, D.F. 2007, “ What does AJAX intend for you? “ , interactions, vol. 14, no. 5, pp. 10.

Apendix 1.0

Date

NUMBER OF USERS

% WORLD POPULATION

INFORMATION SOURCE

December, 1995

16 1000000s

0.40 %

IDC

December, 1996

36 1000000s

0.90 %

IDC

December, 1997

70 1000000s

1.70 %

IDC

December, 1998

147 1000000s

3.60 %

C.I.Almanac

December, 1999

248 1000000s

4.10 %

Nua Ltd.

March, 2000

304 1000000s

5.00 %

Nua Ltd.

July, 2000

359 1000000s

5.90 %

Nua Ltd.

December, 2000

361 1000000s

5.80 %

Internet World Stats

March, 2001

458 1000000s

7.60 %

Nua Ltd.

June, 2001

479 1000000s

7.90 %

Nua Ltd.

August, 2001

513 1000000s

8.60 %

Nua Ltd.

April, 2002

558 1000000s

8.60 %

Internet World Stats

July, 2002

569 1000000s

9.10 %

Internet World Stats

September, 2002

587 1000000s

9.40 %

Internet World Stats

March, 2003

608 1000000s

9.70 %

Internet World Stats

September, 2003

677 1000000s

10.60 %

Internet World Stats

October, 2003

682 1000000s

10.70 %

Internet World Stats

December, 2003

719 1000000s

11.10 %

Internet World Stats

February, 2004

745 1000000s

11.50 %

Internet World Stats

May, 2004

757 1000000s

11.70 %

Internet World Stats

October, 2004

812 1000000s

12.70 %

Internet World Stats

December, 2004

817 1000000s

12.70 %

Internet World Stats

March, 2005

888 1000000s

13.90 %

Internet World Stats

July, 2005

939 1000000s

14.60 %

Internet World Stats

September, 2005

957 1000000s

14.90 %

Internet World Stats

November, 2005

972 1000000s

15.20 %

Internet World Stats

December, 2005

1,018 1000000s

15.70 %

Internet World Stats

March, 2006

1,022 1000000s

15.70 %

Internet World Stats

June, 2006

1,043 1000000s

16.00 %

Internet World Stats

September, 2006

1,066 1000000s

16.40 %

Internet World Stats

December, 2006

1,093 1000000s

16.70 %

Internet World Stats

March, 2007

1,129 1000000s

17.20 %

Internet World Stats

June, 2007

1,173 1000000s

17.80 %

Internet World Stats

Sept, 2007

1,245 1000000s

18.90 %

Internet World Stats

Dec, 2007

1,319 1000000s

20.00 %

Internet World Stats

March, 2008

1,407 1000000s

21.10 %

Internet World Stats

June, 2008

1,463 1000000s

21.90 %

Internet World Stats

December, 2008

1,574 1000000s

23.50 %

Internet World Stats

March, 2009

1,596 1000000s

23.80 %

Internet World Stats

June, 2009

1,669 1000000s

24.70 %

Internet World Stats

Sept, 2009

1,734 1000000s

25.60 %

Internet World Stats