Views of Web 2.0
There are a number of definitions of what constitutes a "Web 2.0 application." From the general, bird's-eye view we are taking, users be able to interact with one another or contribute any information. "Developers, for example, have a much more rigid definition of Web 2.0 than average web users, and this can lead to confusion."
Then we have begun to hear about Web 3.0, which seems to provide us with a guarantee that vague web-versioning nomenclature is here to stay. "By extending Tim Berners-Lee's explanations, the Web 3.0 would be something akin to a "read-write-execute" web. However, this is difficult to envision in its abstract form, so let's take a look at two things I predict will form the basis of the Web 3.0 — semantic markup and web services."
Semantic markup refers to the communication gap between human web users and computerized applications. One of the largest organizational challenges of presenting information on the web is that web applications aren't able to provide context to data, and, therefore, can't really understand what is relevant and what is not. Through the use of some sort of semantic markup, or data interchange formats, data could be put in a form not only accessible to humans via natural language, but able to be understood and interpreted by software applications as well.
While it is still evolving, formatting data to be understood by software agents, leads to the definition, and provides a way to discuss web services.
Views about Web 3.0
A web service is a software system designed to support computer-to-computer interaction over the Internet. Web services are not new and usually take the form of an Application Programming Interface (API). "The popular photography-sharing website Flickr provides a web service whereby developers can programmatically interface with Flickr to search for images. Currently, thousands of web services are available." In the context of Web 3.0, they take center stage. By combining a semantic markup and web services, the Web 3.0 promises the potential for applications that can speak to each other directly, and for broader searches for information through simpler interfaces.
What's important to understand, I think, is that the nomenclature with which we describe these differing philosophies should not be taken too seriously. Just because a website does not employ Web 2.0 features does not make it obsolete. After all, a small ecommerce website trying to sell niche products may not have any business need for users to submit content or to be able to interact with each other.
With this sofware, you don't need to upgrade anything, get new software or anything like that. These are general ideas used to contemplate the challenges developers face on the web in addition to theories about how to address them.
http://www.linkedin.com/answers/technology/web-development/TCH_WDD/697565-70085276
http://ezinearticles.com/?Difference-Between-Web-1.0,-Web-2.0,-and-Web-3.0---With-Examples&id=3683790
