Web 3.14159265
Subject level: Advanced
Today Jeffrey Zeldman announced Web 3.0 over at A List Apart, putting an end to the Web 2.0 hype and preparing us for, um, something else. Okay, all jokes aside, this isn't really about Web 2.0 or 3.0, it's about the hype, the buzz, and the direction. Still with me? Good!
If you go through Jeffrey's article you get a little recap of the dotcom bubble of 2000, along with a hint of fear that we're going to see the same thing happen now with Web 2.0 - a name that would end up being most aptly chosen, in that twist of irony. With Yahoo!, Google and similar giants buying up as many seemingly innovative sites as they can find, with Venture Capitals pouring millions into new startups again before they've proven to be highly profitable, one can't help but slightly nod along with Jeffrey. "We've seen this - right?"
I'm personally still on the fence as to the whole Web 2.0 webstravaganza, but when I think for only one moment of the SXSW Interactive panel that I will be on in March - currently named "Web 2.1: making Web 2.0 accessible" - I must admit that I'm starting to have my own concerns now. Serious concerns.
To me, making fun of buzzwords is a healthy activity. I've said it before but I will repeat it now: I do believe that buzzwords have their place and purpose in our field of expertise. Things become different when a lot of people with a lot of money start getting involved, though. Quite often, investors and businessfolk end up using buzzwords that were made by developers in order for them to do their jobs more easily. Or, not even investors perhaps, just businessfolk in general, as Jeffrey's article so amusingly points out.
The real issue isn't whether it's buzz, hype or hell, though: it's what it's all about, and what we're all about. I can't speak for anyone but myself of course, but I am in this field of expertise in order to try and improve the situation of the Web, not toss it back into a loop just to create a new bubble. I've developed a stronger interest in accessibility over the past 2 years because I'm noticing that consciousness of accessibility issues is much more important than almost everything else. My experience with sites is that the accessibility plans from beforehand largely dictate many of the usability aspects, and a little personal research has shown me that the least accessible sites were also the least usable.
A bold claim, perhaps, but I truly believe that accessibility is a major part of the foundation of a website or application. Accessibility can influence the overall interface design (it's dictated this site's interface), it influences usability (especially with anything that involves forms), it influences markup - and a better understanding and grasp of accessibility seems to lead to major improvements in all other areas.
One of the primary culprits of the issue is Javascript[1]. Javascript is still being used for evil a lot, rather than good, and having Web 2.0 become too big of a hype hasn't helped the situation one bit. AJAX, known for being one of the "trademarks" of Web 2.0, has become so trendy that people started using it just for the sake of it being AJAX. "Very modern, very 2.0" right? Maybe, but to me, it's just very inaccessible. And this is a problem.
What's happening with the buzz and the hype and the whole "Web x.0" is that the focus is being drawn away - again? - from what we so desperately should be looking at: improving the current state of the Web. We're looping back towards 1999, and whether you want to think of that as pre-Bubble or pre-Web Standards era is up to you. For me, it's a viscious circle, making this Web 3.14159265 for all I care. Let's just get our focus back on creating accessible and usable sites, and if you want to add a layer of "folksonomy" or AJAX-y goodness or syndicated Flickr-Wiki-Newsvine-tagging on top of that, by all means be my guest. Just don't go for the icing on the cake before you even have your base.
1 Disclaimer (so that Jeremy doesn't have to go all antfucker on me): I don't mean to say that Javascript is the bad guy here. People wrongly using Javascript are the problem, not the technology itself. [back]
Bookmark: 
Newsvine 
del.icio.us 
Digg
Comments
Subscribe: atom, rss, ..what are feeds?
Archives
- Popular Posts
- Starting with CSS: revisited
- IE7 beta 1 release
- Starting with CSS-based design
- Debunking the price myth: Apple vs. Dell
- Typography: serif vs. sans-serif
- Accessibility Rules & Tips #1: simple steps to make your website more accessible
- Review: System of a Down - Hypnotize
- Announcing: Happy Clog!
- AJAX and Accessibility
- Introducing V8
- Recent Posts
- Times are changing
- A change in direction
- CSS hacks: useful, evil or …laziness?
- Updates on the web
- Pink for October
- Flickrlicious Screensavers with iPhoto 6
- On FACE updates and getting published
- Great speakers I admire
- A new passion
- Standards-senses tingling?
FlickrFire
All times are in CET. It is now 19:45.
Hey Kura long time no see. See you've carried on after vb :D. At any rate nice to hear about the change over seems change within web dev is coming close.. this along with PHP 6 and CSS 3 going to be a good year
How nice, Web Pi. I am neckdeep in the goo that is web 2.0, building a JS heavy website using Google Maps and a lot of AJAX. So far I think using AJAX is only really usefull in webapplications where task complexity and user interaction can be much higher. But even then only to cut corners. An example can be of someone making a news entry. He/she realizes half way that the entry needs to be placed in a non-existing category. That person can then make use of the power of AJAX and DOM scripting to make a new category on the fly and continue with his or her original task of writing the news entry.
Interesting post.
I would call you something worse than antfucker if you hadn't written that foot note. Blaming JavaScript? Sigh... :-)
To be realistic, or maybe cynical, I believe that there will always be people who will do things wrong, who won't care about accessibility etc. There will always be hypes coming and going, new buzzwords, people implementing things becaue they can and not necessarily because it's the best approach.
My hope, though, is that competition in the market will slowly phase those ignorant people out of the picture, and that for each circle things will become better and better.
Other than the very rare and usually uninformed and wide-of-the-mark article by the BBC, I think we tend to forget that the whole 2.0 thing is not even on the radar of most [normal] people. It's only us geeks obssessing over it...
(PS: Any plans to ever make a post that doesn't mention your SXSW panel..? ;)
That's exactly my point I tried to make a couple of weeks ago.
Robert: your hope is shared by me.
Matthew: it's not just us geeks anymore, though. There are many non-geeks who throw the buzz around. The guy in Jeffrey's article is not a geek, if you ask me.
Jeroen: ack, sorry, hadn't read that yet (I'm behind in feeds, and not by a little). Good post, that one. :)
I haven't personally had any experience of anyone outside the web world taking an interest in any of the Web 2.71828183 or whatever banter - though I have heard stories like Jeffreys about US VC's. Is this a US preserve or are people from Europe and further afield feeling it as well I wonder?
Gareth, it's the same in Europe, there's people shouting about Web 2.0 here that haven't the foggiest.
Faruk, no worries of course. Though you should have called it Web 1.618034 ;-)
Just as much as the whole web 2.0 movement is going over the top, this backfire (the "whoa, we've been here before" movement) is doing the exact same thing.
Sit back, relax, do your own best, and it will work out for you, right?
There will allways be lads trying to squeeze everything out of a new technology...it's called creativity. They're not doing it because there is a need, but because they can. (and come on, websites are supposed to be fun)
If your programs..I mean, websites ( ;P ) use "web2.0" just where it's needed, then what's your personal/professional harm? i'm not saying you should stop 'educating the masses', but don't overdo it either.
Customers will still judge websites by their own standards, and thats usability, not the amounth of AJAX covering.
I was already backlashing in october 2005! That's like 400 years in webtime. You are all old news ;)
talk about usability! your page has been trying to load something into my browser for over 5 minutes - perhaps some Flash gizmo - and has got my cpu fan blowing! GOOD GRIEF!
Hi Faruk:
I couldn't agree with you much more. The hype/anti-hype tends to pull us away as much as it raises the consciousness I'm afraid.
I gave your great post some credit in a response to Zeldman's article in the Ajax Developer's Journal.
Hopefully we've hit the bottom of the "trough of disillusionment" but probably not quite yet.
More here on this topic on my blog as well.
Keep up the terrific writing and analysis!
Best,
Dion
humble guest:
That would probably be FACE. If you could contact me with your browser, OS and system specs, we may be able to solve this issue. Only very, very few people seem to have an actual problem with it, but even a few is enough to justify fixing it.
Dion:
Thank you very much for your kind words and the credit. I do hope that with the ALA article and the response from the blogosphere, we'll see renewed focus on the true matters of the Web. It'll not just improve the state of the web, but it'll be a much more interesting experience for all of us.