The Floccinaucinihilipilification of Web 2.0該floccinaucinihilipilification的Web 2.0

It is a dire necessity of the times to do some degree of floccinaucinihilipilification of Web 2.0.這是一個可怕的必要性時代做某種程度的floccinaucinihilipilification的Web 2.0 。 To understand the concerns lets take a look at what makes Web 2.0.要了解的關注，讓考慮一下什麼使Web 2.0的。

Web 2.0 crowd, like its predecessor now commonly referred as Web 1.0 or dotcom hype artists, is characterized by over-enthusiasm of technologies and solutions that have been commonplace in traditional 3-tier applications for decades and even web applications. Web 2.0的人群，像它的前身，現在普遍被稱為作為Web 1.0或dotcom炒作藝術家，特點是過度的積極性，技術和解決方案已是司空見慣，在傳統的3層應用了幾十年，甚至Web應用程序。

Web 2.0 brings in interactivity of plain-jane web applications using AJAX (a JavaScript technology). Web 2.0的互動帶來了在平原-簡Web應用程式的使用AJAX （一個JavaScript技術） 。 Previously many web applications had limited client side interactivity with JavaScript.以前許多Web應用程序有限，客戶端的交互性的JavaScript 。 Any task concerning the server required a round-trip with a new page being loaded as a result of GET or POST request.任何有關的任務的服務器需要一個來回用了新的一頁載入由於GET或POST請求。 Google can be fairly credited for popularizing AJAX. Google可以得到公平貸記普及阿賈克斯。

The type of interactivity mentioned above was however available to Java applets and Flash based applications from the early days of web.該類型的互動上述然而，提供給Java小程序和Flash為基礎的應用，從早年的Web 。 Java applets suffered from negative marketing hype for not much valid reason or fault of its own. Java applets的遭受的負面炒作，為市場營銷沒有太大的正當理由或過失其自身的。 Flash applications suffered too but fared better overall and are seen in many places even today primarily due to its capability for generating nice graphics easily. Flash應用受到太大，但有較佳表現的整體和被認為是在許多地方，即使到了今天，主要是由於自己的能力產生很好的圖形容易。 While a JavaScript solution is preferably because they are inherently present in browser and are lightweight than either of the above; AJAX do not represent a paradigm shift.而一個JavaScript的解決方法是最好，因為他們是在本質上，目前在瀏覽器和輕便比上述任一;阿賈克斯並不代表範式轉移。

Web 2.0 is a term to group some technologies like tagging, blogging etc. Tim O’ Reilly, believed to be the originator of the term, conveniently classifies Web 2.0 by example: Web 2.0是任期組的一些技術，如標記，博客等添O ' Reilly的，相信是發端的任期，方便地進行分類的Web 2.0由例子：

This is obviously a marketing picture and tends to gloss over the failed solutions in the same place.這顯然是一個營銷圖片，並往往掩飾失敗的解決方案，在同一地點。 While AdSense is touted as Web 2.0, its less fortunate brethrens like Kontera are not.而AdSense是號稱Web 2.0的，其那麼幸運brethrens想kontera並非如此。 Kontera uses context sensitive ads over links instead of placing them in fixed locations like AdSense. kontera使用上下文廣告的鏈接，而不是把他們在固定地點如AdSense 。

However taking away the hype there still remains few pieces of technologies worth noting:不過，走炒作仍有幾件技術值得注意的：
Tagging, Blogging, RSS & Atom syndication and Wiki標記，博客的RSS及Atom聯合供稿和Wiki上

Blogging, social network & wiki 博客，社會網絡與Wiki上
Blogging, social networks and wiki represent a trend of increasing user participation.博客，社會網絡和Wiki上代表有增加的趨勢用戶參與。 However they are not the first ones to do so.不過他們並不是最先這樣做。 Bulletin Boards predates even Web.佈告欄，甚至早於網絡。 Forums have been there for ages.論壇已在那裡的千古罪人。 Slashdot is very much Web 1.0 and it too did enable user participation in a big way. Slashdot的是非常的Web 1.0和它也沒有讓用戶參與，在一個大的方式。 Today what we are seeing is a simplification and maturing of these technologies.今天我們所看到的是一個簡化和成熟，這些技術。

BTW: Wiki has been very much a part of Web 1.0.的BTW ： Wiki上有著十分的一部分的Web 1.0 。

Syndication 供稿
Syndication is an age-old concept used by media outlets.聯合是一個歷史悠久的概念，所使用的媒體。 RSS made it simpler and accessible by common people.它的RSS所作的簡單和方便普通百姓。 Almost every blog software today comes with automatic syndication capability built in.幾乎每一個博客軟件，今天與自動聚合的能力，建成英寸

Tagsonomy tagsonomy
Tagging while interesting is not a novel concept either.標記，而有趣的是，並不是一個嶄新的概念。 It is folksonomy with a flat hierarchy.這是分眾分類法與一個單位的層次。

Free & unrestricted service 免費＆無限制服務
It is a common strategy for new product and technologies to be provided for a cheap price and with less restrictions.這是一個共同戰略，新產品和技術，以提供一個便宜的價格和較少的限制。 It is solely aimed at gaining market share.這是純粹旨在獲得市場份額。 Once that objective is established then restrictions start to be added and priced offerings are made.一旦這個目標是既定的限制，然後開始加入和定價的產品提出。 eFax and Namezero are two well known companies from Web 1.0. efax和內木塞羅是兩個著名的公司從Web 1.0 。 eFax offered free fax number to anyone who asked and Namezero offered free domain names. efax提供免費的傳真號碼向任何人誰問及內木塞羅提供免費的網域名稱。 Down the road Namezero just became a value added domain register while eFax offers paid fax-to-email services.下道內木塞羅剛剛成為增值網域註冊的同時， efax提供支付的傳真到電子郵件服務。 Their free service still exists but with lots of restrictions and very hard to find.他們的免費服務仍然存在，但有很多限制，並很難找到。 Namezero stopped giving free domain names.內木塞羅停止提供免費的網域名稱。 MySpace of today has slowly started clamping down on unbridled freedom and moving towards heavily monetizing their service. MySpace上的今天已經慢慢開始打擊就肆無忌憚的自由和走向嚴重的貨幣他們的服務。 Friendster and LinkedIn have followed suit long time ago.和Friendster和LinkedIn的有效法，在很久以前。 Free services will only remain free so long they suit the bottomline of the provider.免費服務將只維持自由，只要他們適應的底線供應商。 Businesses do not provide free and unrestricted service for altruism, neither Google nor anyone else.企業不提供免費和無限制的服務利他主義，不論是Google或其他任何人。 I predict in about 10 years time Google search will become a paid for service too.我預測在大約10年時間， Google搜索將成為有償服務。

Book 2.0 圖書2.0
An interesting thought experiment, as someone suggested, would be to consider a hypothetical world where eBooks are norm and the “revolutionary technology” of paper books have just been introduced.一個有趣的思想實驗，有人提議，將考慮一個假設性的世界裡的電子書是規範和“革命技術”的紙張書籍剛才已介紹了。 Paper books are cheaper, easier to read, carry and share, virtually indestructible, can be easily bookmarked and carried in the toilet and you can donate it when you are done.文件，書籍是更便宜，更易於閱讀，攜帶並分享，幾乎是堅不可摧的，可以很容易地進行書籤和在廁所，你可以捐出它當您完成。 Isn’t it a revolutionary paradigm?是不是一個革命性的範式？ Let’s call it Book 2.0 where Book 1.0 is eBooks as we know today.讓的號召，這本書2.0凡預訂1.0是電子書作為我們今天知道。

Simplification and accessibility to all 簡化和方便所有
The pervading theme of so-called Web 2.0 concepts is making pre-existing technologies simpler and more accessible to common man (or woman).該滲透主題的所謂Web 2.0的概念是決策前的現有技術的簡單和更容易獲得共同的男子（或女子） 。 While commendable, it is hardly worth the hype it is generating.而值得稱道的，這是很難值得炒作，這是發電。 Whenever any technology matures (in this case internet and web), a long phase of trying to make it more accessible and simpler follows automatically.每當任何科技的日趨成熟， （在這種情況下互聯網和網絡） ，一個長期階段的嘗試，使其更方便和更簡單的自動如下。 In that way Web 2.0 is merely Web 1.01 or at best Web 1.1.在這樣的Web 2.0只是Web的1.01或在最佳的Web 1.1 。 It is more evolutionary in nature than anything revolutionary, neither in concept nor in paradigm.這是更進化的性質高於一切的革命，無論是在概念上，也不在範式。

Note:注意：
In the eighteenth century, Eton College found from grammer book four words in Latin which all meant “of little or no value” - flocci, nauci, nihili and pili.在十八世紀，潮流同步的大學生，發現從文法書4個字在拉丁美洲所有的意思“ ，很少或根本沒有價值” -f locci， n auci， n ihili和菌毛。 As an erudite humor, someone joined these together and then stuck –fication at the end to create a noun for the act of deciding that something is worthless.作為一個博學幽默，有人加入，這些一起，然後固定性F ）在去年底創造一個名詞，為的行為，決定的東西是一文不值。 In 1999 Senator Jesse Helms used it in commenting on the demise of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty: “I note your distress at my floccinaucinihilipilification of the CTBT”.在1999年參議員赫爾姆斯用它在評論該消亡全面禁止核試驗條約： “我注意到，您的困擾，在我的floccinaucinihilipilification的全面禁核試條約” 。