<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: No web 2.0 site left behind</title>
	<atom:link href="http://ebiquity.umbc.edu/blogger/2006/01/27/no-web-20-site-left-behind/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://ebiquity.umbc.edu/blogger/2006/01/27/no-web-20-site-left-behind/</link>
	<description>EBB is the ebiquity research group\\\'s blog at the University of Maryland, Baltimore County (UMBC).  We focus on technologies that facilitate the design, implementation and control of distributed, intelligent information systems -- mobile and pervasive computing, ad hoc networking, multiagent systems, knowledge representation and reasoning, and the semantic web.  As the tides of technology ebb and flow, we hope the good ideas wash up on our beach and the bad ones drift back out to sea.</description>
	<pubDate>Sun, 06 Jul 2008 23:17:32 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: James</title>
		<link>http://ebiquity.umbc.edu/blogger/2006/01/27/no-web-20-site-left-behind/#comment-14464</link>
		<dc:creator>James</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Jan 2006 22:52:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ebiquity.umbc.edu/blogger/?p=457#comment-14464</guid>
		<description>"I realize this is just a fun tool, but as popular as it is I thought it would identify the sites a little better."

Since the rules are defined by the Web-using public at-large, and Web 2.0 is itself the epiphenomena of public usage, I'd say it's a remarkably accurate tool.

Of course, I'm biased. 

:)

Actually, the real point of the site is to poke fun at people who want someone else to decide how to label things, and to encourage people to get past the buzzwords and focus on finding real value.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;I realize this is just a fun tool, but as popular as it is I thought it would identify the sites a little better.&#8221;</p>
<p>Since the rules are defined by the Web-using public at-large, and Web 2.0 is itself the epiphenomena of public usage, I&#8217;d say it&#8217;s a remarkably accurate tool.</p>
<p>Of course, I&#8217;m biased. </p>
<p> <img src='http://ebiquity.umbc.edu/blogger/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
<p>Actually, the real point of the site is to poke fun at people who want someone else to decide how to label things, and to encourage people to get past the buzzwords and focus on finding real value.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Michael Whitney</title>
		<link>http://ebiquity.umbc.edu/blogger/2006/01/27/no-web-20-site-left-behind/#comment-14463</link>
		<dc:creator>Michael Whitney</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Jan 2006 20:36:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ebiquity.umbc.edu/blogger/?p=457#comment-14463</guid>
		<description>A nifty little tool, but it seems no one scores high except blogs. Del.icio.us only scores 9. Digg scores 11, Flickr 3, and bloglines is only 4. It seems that all of these companies are web 2.0, but none rank well. By the way half of the sites that are in public beta are marked no. I realize this is just a fun tool, but as popular as it is I thought it would identify the sites a little better.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A nifty little tool, but it seems no one scores high except blogs. Del.icio.us only scores 9. Digg scores 11, Flickr 3, and bloglines is only 4. It seems that all of these companies are web 2.0, but none rank well. By the way half of the sites that are in public beta are marked no. I realize this is just a fun tool, but as popular as it is I thought it would identify the sites a little better.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
