You are seeing the paginated version of the page.
It was specially created to help search engines like Google to build the proper search index.

Click to load the full version of the page

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]

The key features of Web 2.0   include:

  1. Folksonomy - free classification of information; allows users to collectively classify and find information (e.g. tagging)
  2. Rich User Experience - dynamic content; responsive to user input
  3. User Participation - information flows two ways between site owner and site user by means of evaluation, review, and commenting. Site users add content for others to see
  4. Software as a service - Web 2.0 sites developed APIs to allow automated usage, such as by an app or mashup
  5. Mass Participation - Universal web access leads to differentiation of concerns from the traditional internet user base

In 2005, Tim O'Reilly and Dale Dougherty held a brainstorming session to elucidate characteristics and components of the Web 1.0 -> 2.0 transition and what changed:

 Their list included both technical aspects and specific web sites/services, many of which have since gone defunct.

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,  including Library 2.0, Social Work 2.0,  Enterprise 2.0, PR 2.0,  Classroom 2.0,  Publishing 2.0,  Medicine 2.0,  Telco 2.0, Travel 2.0, Government 2.0,  and even Porn 2.0.  Many of these 2.0s refer to Web 2.0 technologies as the source of the new version in their respective disciplines and areas.

Web 2.0 Conference in late 2004, though it was first coined by Darcy DiNucci in 1999,   Although Web 2.0 suggests a new version of the World Wide Web, it does not refer to an update to any technical specification, but rather to cumulative changes in the way Web pages are made and used;


 
A Web 2.0 site may allow users to interact and collaborate with each other in a social mediadialogue as creators of user-generated contentin a virtual community, in contrast to Web sites where people are limited to the passive viewing ofcontent. Examples of Web 2.0 include social networking sites, blogs, wikis, folksonomies, video sharing sites, hosted services, Web applications, and mashups-

The client-side (Web browser) technologies used in Web 2.0 development 


include Ajax andJavaScript frameworks such as YUI Library, Dojo Toolkit, MooTools, jQuery, Ext JS and Prototype JavaScript Framework. 



Ajax programming uses JavaScript and the Document Object Model to update selected regions of the page area without undergoing a full page reload.



To allow users to continue to interact with the page, communications such as data requests going to the server are separated from data coming back to the page (asynchronously). 



Otherwise, the user would have to routinely wait for the data to come back before they can do anything else on that page, just as a user has to wait for a page to complete the reload. 



This also increases overall performance of the site, as the sending of requests can complete quicker independent of blocking and queueing