Creative Commons is what makes Web 2.0 possible. I am now using the Creative Commons license 3.0 BY-NC-SA recommended for teaching, learning and research. This means that anyone can copy, paste and use my material as long as my name remains attached to it, they are not selling it or the finished product with my work in it for profit, and that they add the same BY-NC-SA to their finished work so others can benefit. More
February 25, 2008
WordPress.com’s semantic tools such as categories, tags, urls for individual posts, author’s name generated automatically to each post, dates per post, seem to mimic the function of metatags and are Search Engine friendly. As well, when my delicious tags and wordpress.com’s tags and categories are syncronized, I think this performs a similar role of structuring as metatagging. To make it even more elegant, del.icio.us offers suggestions for popular tags used by other del.icio.us users on posts and sites that have already been entered into their database. For example, del.cio.us suggests these tags for Alex Iskold’s useful post on structuring the Internet through metatagging: Blog, blogging, code, CSS, Design, development, findability, folksonomy, howto, HTML, marketing, metadata, readwriteweb, semantic, semantic_web, semantics, semanticweb, tag, tags, tips, trends, visualization, web, web3.0, webdesign, XHTML, markup, Internet, microformats.
After reviewing the ReadWriteWeb article on structuring the Internet, I looked up the New York Times metatags offered as a best practice model by ReadWriteWeb and attempted to adapt them to my own Speechless blog. WordPress quickly eliminated my outlaw codes leaving no trace.
WordPress did not support my adaptation of the New York Times metatags: when written under ‘Code’ . They are deleted. Under ‘Visual’ this is what they looked like before deletion: more.
Aside: While noting the New York Times metatags, I was also drawn to a comparison of New York Times’ Categories 2008-02:
World, U.S., N.Y. / Region, Business, Technology, Science, Health, Sports, Opinion, Arts, Style, Travel, Jobs, Real Estate, Automobile.
I would like to compare these to the default categories offered by Digg and other major actors in Web 2.0 blogosphere.
to be continued . . .
Iskold, Alex. 2008. “How YOU Can Make the Web More Structured.” >> ReadWriteWeb. Uploaded. January 30, 2008 10:48 PM. Accessed February 2008.
Filed in folksonomy, semantic web
Tags: article, Blog, blogging, code, CSS, Design, development, digg, findability, folksonomy, howto, HTML, Internet, marketing, markup, metadata, metatags, metatags and wordpress.com, microformats, New York Times, ontology, ReadWriteWeb, semantic, semantics, semanticweb, semantic_web, tag, tags, tips, trends, visualization, web, web3.0, webdesign, XHTML
June 14, 2007
Logos from Web 2.0 are caught in the web somewhere between NASA photos of deep space, science fiction landscapes of our inner space, the synapses of the brain, the virtual space that is not abstract, imagined or really real.
Web 2.0, is a term coined by Tim O’Reilly in 2004 for a series of conferences on a revivified Internet. O’Reilly (2005) in what is now considered to be his seminal article claimed that, “If Netscape was the standard bearer for Web 1.0, Google is most certainly the standard bearer for Web 2.0 (O’Reilly 2005). He contrasted Web 1.0 with Web 2.0 by citing examples: DoubleClick vs Google AdSense, Ofoto vs Flickr, Britannica Online vs Wikipedia, personal websites vs blogging, domain name speculation vs search engine optimization, page views vs cost per click, publishing vs participation, content management systems vs wikis directories (taxonomy) vs tagging (”folksonomy”) and stickiness vs syndication. The conceptual map his team devised provides a sketch of Web 2.0 showing social networking sites, wikis, communication tools, and folksonomies.
Although some argue that it does not exist as anything more than geek jargon, for this new user, it is a promising and surprising paradigm shift in the Internet and in software development. I began blogging using Web 2.0 freeware in September 2006. Numerous users like myself have access to sophisticated, ever-improving software technologies since the cost of development is shared among enthusiastic nerds and geeks (in a good way). Freeware on Web 2.0 is not proprietary by nature but is capable of generating huge profits because of the viral way in which users share in the development, marketing and growth of the product while improving connectivity and in content in the process.
Note: June 2007. This image was included in Weinreich’s slideshare album with a layer of text he added:New Generation Social Marketing. He had to resize the image to the PowerPoint format. It is credited to me in the transcript. It is fascinating how digitage such as this has a potential for producing offshoots. I am investigating the potential of slideshare for managing teaching, learning and research digitage (slides) in one place. I started to put them in my Flickr albums. Since I first created this image I have begun to use YouTube, Google docs, iGoogle and Facebook so there are several layers of text orbits to be added . . .
Key words: slideshare, academic, blog, blogging, collaboration, presentation, web2.0, powerpoint, slides, sharing presentations, slideshare, academic, collaboration, presentation, web2.0, powerpoint, slides, sharing presentations, Tim O’Reilly, wordpress.com, vastation, synaptic gasp, swicki, synapses, synaptic cleft, synaptic gap, rapture of the deep internet, photoshop, neuroscience, neural architectonics, mind-brain, googleearth, gather, frimr, flickr, digitage, delicious, cybernarcosis, cyberdelirium, cyberdeliria, creative commons, consciousness, bricoleuse, blogspot, blogging, art and science, technology, mind, Adobe Photoshop
Tim O’Reilly, 2005. “What Is Web 2.0: Design Patterns and Business Models for the Next Generation of Software”. Uploaded 09/30/2005. Accessed January 6, 2007.
Filed in Art and Science, Blogosphere, collaborative, Concepts/Ideas, folksonomy, geotagging, teaching learning and research, Technology and Software, Technology. Mind and Consciousness, virtual, Visual Arts, Visual.Arts, visualizations, Web 2.0
Tags: Adobe Photoshop, bricoleuse, connectivity, Creative Commons, cyberdelirium, del.icio.us, digg, digitage, EndNote, facebook, flickr, Gnosis, Google, Google Docs & Spreadsheets, Google Video, GoogleEarth, HTML, iGoogle, images, Learning from users, metaphorical concepts, My Google Video, My swicki, neural architectonics, New generation social marketing, noise vs. pattern, photoblog, powerpoint, PowerPoint slides, rapture of the deep internet, ReadWriteWeb, rhizome, search engine optimization, semantic markup, SEO, size/resolution, slideshare, slideshow presentions, social bookmarking, social.networks, Switch 1.04, Synaptic cleft, Synaptic gap, Synaptic gasp, tagging, Technorati, Toolbox, vastation, video, Visual Anthropology, wiki, wikipedia, XHTML, youtube, zotero
In my ongoing investigation of connectivity innovations in Web 2.0 I have uploaded shaky (longtake) videos to a YouTube oceanflynn account using the Canon PowerShot A550′s basic video clip capacity. As YouTube background I used a Flickr image adapting Escher’s rippled reflections and Davidhazy’s macro shots of water drops. Flickr images cannot be used directly with YouTube so I used the .jpg url of that image from my Speechless @ WordPress uploads. YouTube seems to limit uploads to one a day? The tags are limited and so are categories. I use travel. Uploading is very fast and easy. There may be fewer views of my slow world videos than on Google Videos. There is more room for descriptions on Google Video. I think the full upload time is longer. Both are seamlessly integrated with WordPress through a simple html-like code using  brackets instead of <> youtube = and googlevideo =
I am using Google docs as a space for note-taking related to my YouTube and Google Videos. It allows me to add images seamlessly with no problems formatting. I appreciate the ‘remove coding’ icon so I can keep coding as plain as vanilla. It helps me keep track of bibliographies and webliographies although these are also on delicious. Google docs also allows for lots of tags (folksonomy is the key to connectivity). Although these docs are often a mess of collaged text, urls and images, they help me keep track of information such as First Nations preferred names for places, evidence of benign colonialism, etc.
I uploaded some digital images from our two excursions this weekend to oceanflynn @ the Google Earth community.
Filed in Blogosphere, folksonomy, geotagging, semantic web, slow world, Technology and Software, Web 2.0
Tags: bricoleuse, connectivity, Creative Commons, cyberdelirium, cyberworld nomad, del.icio.us, Destination Guides, EndNote, ethical topography of self and the Other, facebook, flickr, Google, Google Docs & Spreadsheets, Google Video, GoogleEarth, HTML, Hudson's Bay Company, My Google Video, My swicki, rapture of the deep internet, rhizome, search engine optimization, SEO, social bookmarking, youtube