A buzzword, some new jargon, just a fad, or another marketing brouhaha ?
Well sort of tough to explain in a short span of a blog post, but i'll try.
And as a really short answer, i'll say, an article.
What? Yes really, an article by an influential thought leader, if you will, of what characterizes a successful dotCom. Guess that is where it really began, and then around these central points number of other gurus have commented, built a checklist, recommendations and other examples of what does and does not a Web2.0 site make.
Well, am a dotCom architect, where part of my brief is to make possible features and functionality desired by stakeholders and owners of the web app.
And in my experience, Web2.0 really is all about context; larger background from which one thinks to arrive at what would work with users of the site.
This applies to tech architecture as much as it does to information architecture and user experience.
Yes you read that right, to tech architecture as much as to user experience and information architecture. Now how elements of Web2.0 impact/serve as framework for tech architecture, is a set of posts, so watch this space. For now, here is one element of Web2.0, perpetual beta and its technical application, which implies 'over' doing tech architecture.
And that is consistent with my experience too, where it is counterproductive to spend too much time creating a framework of similar complexity and depth as one would for an enterprise application. Yup, that 'Beta' tag applies all the way through, to the steel frame as much as to the woodwork.
Aghast? Surprised? Don't agree? Do comment and as i said earlier, watch this space.
No comments:
Post a Comment