How about Web 3G?

I’m here at the BlogTalk conference in Cork, Ireland with a range of bloggers and technologists discussing the emerging social Web. Including myself, Ian Davis and Paul Miller from Talis, there are also a bunch of other Semantic Web folks including Dan Brickley, and a group from DERI Galway.

Over dinner a few of us were discussing the terms “Semantic Web” versus “Web 3.0” and we all felt a better term was needed. After some thinking, Ian Davis suggested “Web 3G.” I like this term better than Web 3.0 because it loses the “version number” aspect that so many objected to. It has a familiar ring to it as well, reminding me of the 3G wireless phone initiative. It also suggests Tim Berners-Lee’s “Giant Global Graph” or GGG — a synonym for the Semantic Web. Ian stayed up late and put together a nice blog post about the term, echoing many of my own sentiments about how this term should apply to a decade (the third decade of the Web), rather than to a particular technology.

Social tagging: > > > > > > > > > >

2 Responses to How about Web 3G?

  1. Samir Shah says:

    I prefer Web 3.0. People are familiar with Web 2.0 and hence they will expect something new with Web 3.0. Web 3G confuses the user. The user thinks of it as if it is mobile Web.

  2. Hello: I have given this a bit of thought myself, and think 3G is quite a good name. It does remind me of an old Mac though, as Apple has used the G for Generation naming scheme for a while, and a 3g was a while ago now. I also wonder if trying to name some of this movement is difficult because of its lack of homogeneity? What would the 3G comprise? RDF and Sparql, Semantic Applications, the Graph?
    I wonder if the naming scheme is similar to naming the historical period one lives in. We call ourselves ‘Post Modern’, but who knows where our grandchildren will put dividing lines, and what they’ll call us–Post Post Modern?
    In any case, 3G sounds better than Web 3.0, and is less geeky. So it might be a refreshing change from the litany of labels.