WEB 2.0 PATTERNS

Carolina Marin

Content Introduction The Participation-Collaboration Pattern The Collaborative Tagging Pattern

Introduction The main objective is to identify patterns

used in what is called Web 2.0, which is based on Service Oriented Architecture. Two of the most common patterns used in web 2.0 applications are

The Participation-Collaboration Pattern The Collaborative Tagging Pattern

The Participation-Collaboration Pattern Intent Describes the functionality of the

collaboration between users in applications based on technology web 2.0

Context This pattern can be useful when a group of

people has a common interest in sharing and appending information about a specific subject. It recognizes that an open process may provide better results than having only a few people present their knowledge and the main goal is to let people

Example A small company that wants to create a manual

covering the use of one of its products. The traditional approach is to gather a small set of experts to write it, hopefully minimizing the potential for costly errors. Manuals face a market of readers with different skill levels, though, and the company’s writers may not always get everything right. Customers often know what they need better than the company does, but the flow of information has traditionally gone from the publisher to the customer, rather than the other way around.

Problem How to find a way to share information with

people in different places and with different areas of expertise.

Forces -There are issues that can be solved better

when many people collaborate, we should provide a convenient way for them to interact.

-Consistent participation may provided a platform for some uses to be recognized.

Solution Implement a collaborative platform through which humans

or application actors can contribute knowledge, code, facts, and other material relevant to a starter discussion can be made available, possibly in more than one format or language, and participants can then modify or append to that core content.

The collaborative platform allows the user to modify an article, upload images, videos and audio, to do that the user must have an account to be identified to the reviewer, who is the person in charge of review and decided if the changes made to an article are appropriate

First the user needs to log in the platform then he can make all the changes that he wants but those changes are not published until the reviewer take the final decision.

Class Diagram

Consequences This pattern has the following advantages: Allows users in any place to modify content; they

can share text, videos, images and can discuss any topic trying to collaborate and give different ideas.

Experts demonstrate their knowledge or talent about certain topic and they can be recognized in their field of study.

Disadvantages: Sometimes the reviewers don’t know about a

specific topic and they can eliminate important or useful content

Known uses Platform of collaboration as Wikipedia in the

case of social networks the Facebook developer wiki is a platform to share applications and code to be use in Facebook

The Collaborative Tagging Pattern

Intent The collaborative tagging pattern is useful to

share content using keywords to tag bookmarks, photographs and other content.

Context The collaborative tagging is useful when a user

needs to search different kinds of content like pictures, text, online content, audio files, bookmarks, news, items, websites, products, blog posts, comments, and other items available online. This pattern is helpful because people have more sources to find the information.

Example Often, we need to use a search system to find

resources on the Internet. The resources must match our needs, and to find relevant information, we need to enter search terms. The search system compares those terms with a metadata index that shows which resources might be relevant to our search. The primary problem with such a system is that the metadata index is often built based on resources being tagged by a small group of people who determine the relevancy of those resources for specific terms. The smaller the group that does this , the greater the chance is that the group will apply inaccurate tags to some resources or omit certain relationships between the search terms and the resources’ semantic relevancy.

Problem How to find different sources of information without using

metadata because the results with this type of taxonomy a few specialized words that are recognized by a small group of people who determine the relevancy of those for specific terms.

The solution to this problem is affected by the following forces:

-Resources must be associated with a metadata infrastructure that lets anyone interacting with the resources add tags to them to make declarations about their relevancy.

-The system must be bi-navigational so that searchers can find all the tags attached to a specific resource and find other resources tagged with the same terms.

-The tags themselves must be part of some normative or natural language to represent meaning.

Solution In a collaboration tagging system, the number of

ways of classify an item is undefined and the choices can be as different as the users and all of these are marked as valid.

The items don’t belong to a specific category, and they have an unlimited number of tags.

First the user selects a resource then he makes a semantic declaration about the resource adding a tag, this tag as we mentioned early can be anything. The user has freedom to assign any word to a resource, after the user tag a resource the domain changes the content and people can start to use the tag.

The following definitions apply only to this pattern: • To tag means to apply labels to an object or

resource. • Resource is used to denote any digital asset that

can have an identifier. Examples of resources include online content, audio files, digital photos, bookmarks, news items, websites, products, blog posts, comments, and other items available online.

• An User is any human, application, process, or other thing that is capable of interacting with a resource.

• Conceptual domain is the total set of objects and actions that the language provides

ConsequencesThis pattern has the following advantages: Users can classify their collections of items in the ways

that they find useful The results when they try to find a word have a lot

variety and meaningsLiabilities When users can freely choose tags, the resulting

metadata can include the same tags used with different meanings and multiple tags for the same concept, which may lead to inappropriate connections between items and inefficient searches for information about a subject

There is no explicit information about the meaning of each tag

The personalized variety of terms can present challenges when searching and browsing.