WEB 2.0

Web 2.0 is a buzzword introduced in 2003/04 which is commonly used to encompass various novel phenomena on the World Wide Web. Although largely a marketing term, some of the key attributes associated with Web 2.0 include the growth of social networks, bi-directional communication, various ‘glue’ technologies, and significant diversity in content types The term ‘Web 2.0’ was officially coined in 2004 by Dale Dougherty, a vice-president of O’Reilly Media Inc. (the company famous for its technology-related conferences and high quality books) during a team discussion on a potential future conference about the Web (O’Reilly, 2005a). The team wanted to capture the feeling that despite the dot-com boom and subsequent bust, the Web was ‘more important than ever, with exciting new applications and sites popping up with surprise.

Wikipedia(2011) defines the Web 2.0 is a term often applied to a perceived ongoing transition of the World Wide Web from a collection of websites to a full-fledged computing platform serving web applications to end users. Ultimately Web 2.0 services are expected to replace desktop computing applications for many purposes.
Tim O’Reilly (2005) defines Web 2.0 is the network as platform, spanning all connected devices; Web 2.0 applications are those that make the most of the intrinsic advantages of that platform: delivering software as a continually-updated service that gets better the more people use it consuming and remixing data from multiple sources, including individual users, while providing their own data and services in a form that allows remixing by others creating network effects through an “architecture of participation,” and going beyond the page metaphor of Web 1.0 to deliver rich user experiences.”

Anderson(2007) stated that based on concepts originally outlined by Tim O’Reilly, that can help us to explain and understand why Web 2.0 has had such a huge impact. In short these are ideas about building something more than a global information space; something with much more of a social angle to it. Collaboration, contribution and community are the order of the day and there is a sense in which some think that a new ‘social fabric’ is being constructed before our eyes. However, it is also important to acknowledge that these ideas are not necessarily the preserve of ‘Web 2.0’, but are, in fact, direct or indirect reflections of the power of the network: the strange effects and topologies at the micro and macro level that a billion Internet users produce.

Evolution stages of the internet Web 2.0

Wright and Zdinak (2010) state that as new technology comes into play, new possibilities emerge. The second generation internet gave the user the power to contribute content and further develop the environment in which the internet operates. At the same time a new process began: the process of linking content together and creating a real network, rather than just isolated Web pages and services. Google page rank – a breakthrough in search – is an early stage of the Web 2.0 era. User involvement in content development began with users developing and sharing their own content on a given platform. They were able to use all the tools and options that the platform offered them, but not to change it. Examples of these first generation services include sites like blogger.com, wikipedia.org, or youtube.com.
We are now in a second stage, where users can customize the platform (or parts of the platform, even if the core stays the same). This is done with tools like widgets (also called gadgets), mash‑ups (software plug-ins), or RSS (feeds providing constantly updated information on topics of interest to the user). With these tools, users can change the core patterns of the platform based on how they would like to see it. We can only guess what could happen next. For example, could a third stage of Web 2.0 allow users themselves to develop individual platforms in open software environments? Of course, in order to achieve this, the use of software tools would have to be greatly simplified. However, was this to happen we would be talking again about an evolutionary development of a new internet generation. The internet might become the core of computer operations, taking the place of operation systems as we know them today.

Anderson (2007) identifies and explains below the Key Idea of web 2.0 to include,
1 Individual production and User Generated Content
2 Harness the power of the crowd
3 Data on an epic scale
4 Architecture of Participation
5 Network Effects
6 Openness
Individual Creativity
Web 2.0 enables and facilitates the active participation of each user. Web 2.0 applications and services allow publishing and storing of textual information, by individuals (blogs) and collectively (wikis), of audio recordings (podcasts), of video material (videocasts), of pictures, etc. Authoring of this user generated content is greatly facilitated by providing easy to use desktop-like interfaces.

Harnessing the Power of the Crowd
Web 2.0 services are characterized by the fact that their value increases the more people are using it. A traditional static Web site does not \improve” when visited by large amounts of surfers since it presents its content the same, static way. In contrast, Web 2.0 sites use information provided by the visitors explicitly (user contributions build up the site or part of it) or implicitly (user activities on the site are used for adapting its content or presentation). The explicit and implicit harnessing of the power of the crowd is best example by Wikipedia and Amazon. In the online encyclopedia Wikipedia, the user explicitly contributes to the encyclopedia by adding and editing articles. In the online shop Amazon, collaborative altering based on the shopping behavior is used for making suggestions to the customers. Each page describing an article contains suggestions of related products.

Diverse Data on an Epic Scale
In Web 2.0, data is often as important as function. Take del.icio.us as an example: its functionality is voluntarily limited to the basic function of bookmarking with tags; however, the value of del.icio.us emerges from the massive amount of annotated resources. Thus Web 2.0 services employ different measures for increasing user contributions and participations, for instance by building trust (e. g., ordering users to leave with an export of their data), by explicit licenses (often open licenses such as Creative Commons), and paradoxically, by making content accessible through RSS syndication and APIs. Behind the user-provided data of Web 2.0 lies the Semantic Web [10] with its vision to make the data currently hidden in databases available for usage by machines. As a result, Web 2.0 enables access to data at an unprecedented scale, such as pictures (e. g., Flickr) 4), bookmarks, mapping data (e. g., Google Maps), but also indexed data, http://del.icio.us

Architecture of Assembly
Similar to traditional Web services, the Web 2.0 makes data and functionality accessible. Users can access Web 2.0 services by browsing the Web sites but also through APIs. Typically, APIs allow adding, changing, and retrieving data. Content is disseminated by RSS/Atom feeds that allow users to pull the data without ever visiting the site itself. Most content created in the Web 2.0 is micro-content: small, self-contained units, such as blog entries, images and other multimedia content well suited for remixing. This micro-content can be combined with other data and services, e. g., tags of Flickr photos can be used to show the location in Google Maps. In difference to traditional Web-services, the Web 2.0 approach is characterized by pragmatic solutions and lightweight formats.
Additionally, existing Web 2.0 services often disseminate their functionality by plug-in modular components, so called widgets]. This allows integrating the service on a given Web-site by adding only several lines of code. For instance, the micro blogging service used in our second use case can be added in the blogs of the learners very easily. The potential for education resulting from this mix-up mash-up culture is twofold. First, individual creativity can take place at a level higher than content: just like new content is created by combining other content, new functionality is created by mash-ups. Secondly, the syndication of functionality by widgets allows extending existing learning environments. This way, additional expression channels can be added at a very low cost.

Independent Access to Data
Ideally, Web 2.0 services reach for a wider range of clients than the PC browser. They allow access from and dissemination of data to devices such as mobile phones, PDAs, game consoles, etc. By ordering multiple sources of input, this principle increases potential participation of the user. Additionally, the location-awareness that often comes along with mobile devices makes new applications possible, e. g., location-aware dating, sight-seeing, etc. In addition to device independence, the data on a Web page itself becomes independent of the intended usage of the server and, as a consequence, resources located at an URL become usable in a number of ways. Rendering the data for presentation in a browser, the standard processing of today, is only one of the multiple potential applications.
• Collaboration
People are starting to take a more active role in the development of information and knowledge.
Traditional reference works, such as encyclopedias, are no longer seen as the only sources of reliable information. Through collaboration – the collective development of information and knowledge – more people have more access to a greater fund of global knowledge than any formalized information source has previously been able to provide.
• Social interaction
The internet allowed people to develop and capitalize on their social circles (such as networking groups and sports clubs). It then allowed people to expand them.
• Active participation
People are no longer passive receivers of information. They want to contribute and share their own perspectives.
• Personalization
People now want more personalized information. The changing radio industry is an example of this. In recent years there has been a growth in the number of small radio stations focusing on niche markets, like news, jazz, sport or Latin music, all enabled by the ability to disseminate: the internet gives access and communication, worldwide, to even the smallest of niches.

THE IMPACT OF CHANGE ON INTERNET USERS
Wright and Zdinak (2010) identify and explain that Changes to the internet are clearly having a major effect on the Web environment. But most of all, perhaps, they are having an effect on users: on how they react to the promise of an evolved internet, on what they do with it – even on exactly who those users are. Together, these factors are creating a new type of user. He or she is User 2.0.
Individuals as Users 2.0
An increasing number of individual users rely on the internet to fulfill their communication, entertainment or social needs7. Their online presence mirrors their offline activities such as hobbies, socializing with friends, studies or just having fun. As a result, groups of users are creating internet communities. Every user is usually a member of a number of internet communities.
Users have changed from passive receivers of content into active creators and contributors (see table). As we have noted, this is happening through blogs, social networks, wikis, mash-ups, virtual worlds, RSS, widgets and other tools.

Passively reading and searching for content actively creating and sharing content online
Dependent on the content creator; not able to express own opinion can express opinions and even change the content presented
Usually using dial-up or first generation broadband connection usually using broadband internet connection or even optical fibre getting the Web as it is Customizing Web pages and content
Email is the main communication tool Peer-to-peer programs are the main communication tools
The computer is the main access point Able to connect from various devices Logging on to the internet for time-limited sessions often connected online all the time

Wright and Zdinak(2010) identify and explain below the following as the Impacts of web 2.0 on behaviours of online users.
The major impacts are:
i. A shift of attitudes of internet users
ii. Growth in broadband connection
iii. Content being delivered free of charge
iv. Online social networking as a new communication domain
v. Fragmentation of consumer markets
vi. The internet as the main source and transmitter of knowledge
vii. Internet privacy, online security and data ownership
Shift of attitudes of internet users
Today’s internet users are more strongly engaged. In many cases, this means that they have switched from their traditional reader/consumer roles to those of active creators. This takes the internet network into a new phase, one where a growing number of users are taking an active role in the development of content and applications. Global shared knowledge results from collaboration, where ‘the knowledge of crowds’ ensures that information is correct and up-to-date.
Consumers – internet users – are donating their free time to the development of online content and are sharing it free of charge, in such forms as blog posts, videos, podcasts and software applications. They are enjoying building new relationships online through social networks and virtual worlds. And they are updated about the news that interests them through RSS feed messages.
Internet users are less inclined to spend their free time watching TV and more likely to increase their time spent online13. They are increasingly likely to need ‘always on’ broadband and mobile broadband: internet connection almost everywhere and at any time. This process is also termed ‘democratization of the Web’. This means that everybody has the right to contribute and all opinions are taken as equal, regardless of the author’s social status, academic education or occupation. A vast amount of knowledge is available online, much more in fact than has ever been collected in one place at one time14. For many users the internet is even becoming the main source and transmitter of knowledge.
The combination of the internet, Web 2.0 tools and a new philosophy is the starting point for this trend. It is, arguably, the first medium in history to enable the real-time engagement of its consumers.

Growth in broadband connection
Worldwide spending on internet connections reached $160 billion in 2007 and will grow to over
$251 billion in 2012. The total number of internet users globally is currently 1.24 billion.
This figure is expected to rise to 3.1 billion in 2012.
Content being delivered free of charge
Early adopters of Web 2.0 applications (content providers and peer-to-peer networks) made most of the content available to the end-user free of charge. This makes it difficult for other content providers entering the market to come up with sustainable business models, a process also known as ‘commoditization of content’. Content providers are thus forced to change their business models. To make up for the lack of revenue from the content itself they are looking to alternative income streams: bundling the content with other services, for example, or bringing in advertising. If content is free the question arises: who is actually paying for the internet? Aside from advertisements the main revenue streams are network connection fees. In fact some users actually confuse payment for the internet connection with payment for content, believing that paying for a connection gives them the right to download content free of charge and legally. The result could be a business model in which internet providers partner with content providers to develop common offerings for the end-user20.
Apart from connection fees, the main source of internet revenue is advertising. Analysis indicates that more than 80 per cent of all revenues of social networks and other content delivering applications come from this source. However, despite the tremendous growth of online advertising21, the income from advertising alone won’t be sufficient to make the industry profitable. Most of the spending will be split among a few players, with current leader Google and its concept of content advertisements earning over $16.6 billion during 2007). However, other possible sources of revenues are being examined. One is user payments, possibly in the form of gate-keeping fees. In this system the user pays for access to an application or premium content. Another is micropayments. Here, users buy small virtual items for virtual money, allowing them to increase their user experience in the service. Other revenue sources, albeit underdeveloped at the moment, include product affiliations, whereby various companies tie their products together, and corporate partnerships that capitalize the services of both partners. For example, a social networking site might deliver tailored content from a partner news site to registered users, thus expanding the user base of both sites23. Peer-to-peer networks and video-sharing services such as YouTube, however, have also uncovered a possibly sensitive area. A large proportion of the content shared in such instances may in fact be breaching intellectual property rights, something that could be regarded as a threat, in particular by the music and movie industries.
Online social networking as a new communication domain
Since the first social networking portals were created in 2005, the new medium has enjoyed tremendous growth, reaching an estimated 328 million online users in 2008. Growth is expected to continue at 20 per cent a year until 2012, when these portals will reach 565 million users24, 25. Led mainly by young users, 42 per cent of all internet users in developed countries regularly visit social networking sites26, 27. The share of users in developing countries is also growing strongly.
Social networking services are very effective ways to communicate among people, in many cases replacing email or mobile text messages. They also serve as a way to share content such as videos, images and music. And they are a much more effective way for users to stay connected to, and updated about, the activities of huge numbers of other users on a richer scale than any one-to-one personal network.
Online social networking services are now starting to replace TV and many other media forms as places for young consumers to spend their free time, in part because ‘always on’ internet broadband connections allow them to have unlimited time online. In fact the average consumer in Europe spends 12 hours a week online and nearly a third spend upwards of 16 hours28.
Fragmentation of consumer markets
Consumer habits are shifting. There is now a higher level of individualism and differentiation.
This in turn is eroding traditional approaches to market segmentation, as consumer groups become even more segmented29.
Web 2.0 is strengthening this trend. Every internet user can pursue his or her specific interest online, be it finding books on very specific topics, or a niche musical taste, and find a network of like-minded people. In a small community this market group would lack critical mass. On the internet, all like-minded users can be part of it. The global reach of the internet gives these niche markets segments a large collective population and can provide relevant business opportunities, not least because potential customers can be reached easily through the internet30.
Further enhancing such business opportunities is the growing ability of ISPs and service providers in general to understand their customers in much more detail; they now have the ability to understand customer habits and behaviours and classify their users into very specific marketing/opportunity segments.
The internet as the main source and transmitter of knowledge
Through internet encyclopedias such as Wikipedia and information-sharing
Web elements such as blogs, videos and podcasts, not to mention search powerhouses like Google, the internet is becoming for many people the main source of information and knowledge development. Much of this knowledge is based on collaboration (which we referred to earlier as ‘the knowledge of crowds’).
The internet has also enabled global co-operation in R&D. Research teams worldwide are co‑operating on similar tasks, taking advantage of each other’s free computing capacity and thus increasing the capacity of the wider network, an approach similar to peer-to-peer networking

WEB 2.0 ELEMENTS
Day (2003) states and explains below that various applications are both making Web 2.0 a reality and allowing end-users to live their 2.0 experience
A.1 Blogs
Blogs are personal Web diaries, where users can offer their ideas, experiences and opinions on any topic. A typical blog combines text, images, and links to other blogs, websites or sources. Sound or video can also be added. Blogs can become either thematic or general. Thematic blogs focus on specific areas or issues (sport, technology development, travelling or politics, for example). General ones are more like a daily diary in which the diarist can write about almost anything.
During 2006 corporate blogs became popular. Written by C level representatives of corporations about the corporation and its latest developments or hot issues, they helped to build interaction with potential customers.
The difference between a blog and a standard personal web-page is that users can update the content easily, directly from a browser, and so typing a blog becomes as easy as writing a normal document on a computer. Technorati (see box) currently counts around 112 million blogs worldwide with many more being added every day.

A.2 Collective intelligence – Wikis
Knowledge in the Web 2.0 environment is built directly by the users. Some of the most popular tools for building shared knowledge are so-called wikis. These are websites that allow the user to freely add and upgrade content directly from the Web browser. Wikis are often used as a source of common knowledge by a certain group, allowing members so increase their own understanding and share their learning.
When a critical mass of participation is reached within a site or system, we can say that collective intelligence has been achieved. That is, there are enough participants monitoring a site’s content to ensure that only valuable information is included.58
Examples
A.3 Digital content management (media sharing websites)
Sharing of videos and personal images has become one of the most popular parts of the Web.
End-users share videos and images – personal or professional – with other end-users. The videos
are watched, enjoyed (or not), rated and discussed. Podcasts operate on a similar basis except that they involve sound-only files uploaded onto the internet.
Examples
A.4 Social networks
Social networks are special applications that combine some of the elements mentioned above.
Members of the networks choose who they wish to interact with. However, their choice is often based on one or more types of interdependency, such as values, friends and hobbies59. The groups are either general, where users share unsorted content, or focused on content reflecting a shared interest, a network of pet lovers, book lovers or wireless technology experts.
Case study: social networking in Korea

K A.5 Mash-ups
A mash-up is a Web application that combines data from more than one source into a single integrated tool. An example is the use of cartographic data from Google Maps to add location information to real estate data. This creates a new and distinct Web service that was not originally provided by either source60. At the moment the main portal allowing mash-ups is the social network Facebook. However, many others, including market leader MySpace, have announced that they are going to open their applications for external applications development.
A.6 Virtual worlds
A virtual world is an interactive simulated environment accessed by multiple users through an online interface. There are many different types of virtual worlds. However, all of them have six features in common: shared space, a graphical user interface, immediacy, interactivity, persistence, and socializing (or community). End-users live in the virtual worlds through ‘avatars’ – three dimensional representations of the user in the virtual world environment. Virtual platforms can enable new consumer behaviours. For example, users play an active role in shaping their environment through ‘co-creation’. Such virtual world dynamics could offer a way of finding out how people and businesses can interact to build economies based on user generated content and services.

A.7 Really Simple Syndication (RSS)
RSS is perhaps the easiest of these items to define. The end-user receives a short message containing information with content he or she has previously defined. It is mostly used by internet news services such as news pages or blogs to notify users about articles that are newly published or that focus on selected topics of interest.
A.8 Tagging
Tags are one-word descriptors that can be assigned to bookmarks to help users organize and remember them. They are similar to keywords, but they are chosen by the user, and do not form a hierarchy. An author can assign as many tags to a bookmark as he or she likes and rename or delete them later, a much easier and more flexible process than fitting information into pre‑defined categories or folders64. Tags can be added also to digital content: for example they can show a certain part of a photograph, or direct a user to a specific place in a podcast. Because they make it easier to locate the exact content a user is searching for tags can become a step towards the Semantic Web (see Chapter 5).
A.9 Peer-to-peer programs
Peer-to-peer programs involve the computer sharing part of its own transmission capacity, or certain content with other users in the same network. Often used for file sharing, communication, or data transmission, peer-to-peer programs have recently become popular among young users for sharing of content like music, or movies, or for communication using programs such as Windows Messenger or Skype65.
Example: Skype Technologies
A.10 Widgets
Widgets (also called gadgets) are ‘mini applications’, simple bits of code dragged onto a desktop or pasted into a personal page, where they are constantly updated with any kind of information the user wants or approves. Widgets can be used to update Web pages with news sections downloaded from other sites, or simply to customize the user interface in whichever program the user is using. This is an important step in the development of Web 2.0: it means that users are taking ownership of the look of their interfaces.
Environment for Web 2.0
The environment in which Web 2.0 operates is created both by organizations that have a direct impact on the development of Web 2.0 and by technologies that deliver the online experience for users.
However, the Web 2.0 would not exist without an environment in which users can have their online experiences. This environment consists of software applications, internet connection points, technologies, hardware and other elements. Together they enable Web 2.0 to fulfill its own mission of human interaction. This environment has its own ecosystem. This ecosystem consists mainly of content creators such as Yahoo, Google and Facebook; technology providers such as Orange, Microsoft,
Alcatel‑Lucent, Cisco, Nokia and Ericsson; consultants and system integrators such as
Alcatel‑Lucent and Cisco; and other influencers such as national telecommunication market regulators and local moral authorities. These groups include sub-categories, described below.
Content and platform providers
Companies in the sector are the main interfaces with the end-user. They create a platform – the user interface with a preliminary set of functions available to the end-user – and content – applications which the user can use, watch, hear or read.
Platform providers are influential. They determine the future direction of Web 2.0 developments; they address and forecast new trends and changing user behaviours; and they provide solutions to suit these developments, trends and behaviours.
eContent providers
These participants provide and place content into the user interface. There are currently two main content providers: media and other users. Both traditional and new media contribute by making archive content (newspapers, archives or old movies, say) available online. Users contribute through the provision of text, sound and image (such as pictures, videos, articles and podcasts).
Platform creators
Companies in this group create the platform that stores all the content and allows users to view
it. They include companies running social networks such as MySpace, LinkedIn and Facebook; search firms such as Google and Yahoo; virtual worlds such as SecondLife and World of
Warcraft; digital content storage spaces such as YouTube and Flickr; and others such as blog sites or collective intelligence spaces.
Within the ‘others’ category we can also put dramatic innovations about to gain critical mass, or hybrid applications of platforms already described. The sort of small, innovative company that makes a success of such approaches usually ends up being integrated with a bigger player, or indeed becomes one itself.
Technology providers
Companies in this sector give end-users tools for connecting to the online environment and working there effectively – tools, in short, that enable them to live the online experience.
Internet access providers
Internet access providers are main enablers, in the sense that they provide end-users with the opportunity to connect to the whole network and capitalize on the benefits the network provides them.
Internet access providers create the technical background for the existence of Web 2.0 by increasing the footprint of connection points globally. They also improve the quality and accessibility of connections for end-users and set up new technical standards with the aim of developing faster and more reliable connections (see Appendix B).
Ground network infrastructure builders
Telecommunication service providers would not be able to provide quality access to the internet, were there not a basic backbone communication infrastructure distributed across countries via cable, wireless or satellite.
The capacity and connectivity of this basic technology infrastructure is one of the main drivers of Web 2.0’s success. In some cases internet access providers will take over the role of building the main basic infrastructure, thus allowing them more easily to capitalize on emerging business opportunities.
cyclopaedia written completely by users. In six years it has grown to become a trusted source
Hardware, technical devices and software producers
These companies enable the individual end-users to connect to the internet and create content there. Hardware and technical device producers provide the tools that allow a user to connect.
Software producers provide access and the ability to create and change content, which is then uploaded to the internet.

User security enablers
Viruses, data fraud, personal data misuse and identity fraud are big concerns for all the groups mentioned above – and of course for their customers. User security enablers therefore play a unique role in the development of Web 2.0: their products have to build the trust of the end-users in the security of the system, be that anti-virus prevention, secure data transfer, or control over content stored online. This makes security enablers in the online environment more than just software providers; they are unique elements working both with the end-user and with content platform providers.
Consultants and system integrators
This group ties together all the other groups, thereby enhancing the experience of the end-user.
Members of this group provide systems design, technology development and consultancy, helping both users and organizations to get the most out of their virtual experience. Consultants and system integrators can support content and platform providers as well as technology providers. They do this by working with tools that ensure not only that the applications run but that they are stable as well as profitable.
Other influencers
Local moral standard-setting organizations
Web 2.0 would not be possible without its users. Thus local moral standards defined by moral authorities, such as the church, local politicians or teachers, can be influential. Some of these authorities might declare Web 2.0 applications a threat to its users and use their powers to stop those users accessing some or all internet-based applications. At the moment, this tends to apply mainly to social networking: there are already examples from some UK schools, which are denying access on school computers to certain sites such as Facebook and advising parents to do the same, based on concerns about its use. However, it is also possible that these authorities could become driving forces for the further development of Web 2.0, or even further evolution of the system.
Market regulators and influencers
And finally we should mention the influence of market regulators on the creation of the Web 2.0 environment. They might be extremely strong in some countries, where, for example, access to certain content is completely denied to inhabitants. However, in almost every country certain content is regulated, denied completely, or only accessible under certain conditions and registrations (such as adult-only content).f information. It contains more than 8.7 million articles, created by 75,000 active contributors in more than 250 different languages.
T

REFERENCES
Carsten Ullrich(2008). Why Web 2.0 is Good for Learning and for Research:Principles and Prototypes . Retrieved on 4/11/2011, from www2008.org/papers/pdf/p705-ullrichA.pdf

Michael Day( 2003). Collecting and Preserving the World Wide Web. Version 1.0, 25th Feb, 2003. JISC:
Bristol, UK.Retrieved on 5/11/2011, from http://www.jisc.ac.uk/uploaded_documents/archiving_feasibility.pdf

O’REILLY, T. 2005. Web 2.0: Compact Definition. O’Reilly Radar (blog), 1st October 2005. O’Reilly
Media Inc. Retrieved on 5/11/2011, from http://radar.oreilly.com/archives/2005/10/web_20_compact_definition.html

Paul Anderson(2007) What is Web 2.0? Ideas, technologies and implications for Education.
JISC Technology and Standards Watch, Feb. 2007.WWW.jisc.ac.uk.org
Simon Wright and Juraj Zdinak(2010).
New communication behaviours in a Web 2.0 world — Changes,challenges and opportunities in the era of the Information Revolution. Retrieved 5/11/2011,from http://enterprise.alcatel-lucent.com

Advertisements
Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: