<?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"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Yelping All Over Town</title>
	<atom:link href="http://mikethoughts.com/2008/05/18/yelping-all-over-town/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://mikethoughts.com/2008/05/18/yelping-all-over-town/</link>
	<description>Just another WordPress site</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 28 Jul 2010 01:29:41 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mike Templeton</title>
		<link>http://mikethoughts.com/2008/05/18/yelping-all-over-town/#comment-13</link>
		<dc:creator>Mike Templeton</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 May 2008 19:04:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://miketempleton.info/?p=13#comment-13</guid>
		<description>@Ari: Thanks for the comment. Here&#039;s my take on Web 2.0:

Though the &quot;Web 2.0&quot; term &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/oreilly/tim/news/2005/09/30/what-is-web-20.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;wasn&#039;t coined until late 2005&lt;/a&gt;, the aspects and features of Web 2.0 websites existed long before then.

Yelp, which started in 2004, is an excellent example of a site that epitomizes those features. The site depends on audience interaction and user-generated content to survive. Without that discussion and ever-evolving content, Yelp would have died long ago. Also, an important aspect of Web 2.0 in my mind is that the site must continue to grow and develop with the times. As mobile browsing has become more popular, Yelp has launched a mobile version. People wanted to share their Yelp reviews on other websites, so Yelp developed review widgets for users to place anywhere. It&#039;s things like this that help solidify Yelp&#039;s existence in the Web 2.0 space.

As for a site like IMDb, I believe that many of the key features are there (discussion topics, user created movie lists, ratings and reviews), but where I see them lacking is the interaction with the rest of the online world. They do have great interaction with their own audience, but I would like to see tie-in&#039;s between IMDb and FriendFeed, Facebook, Twitter or other social sites out there. Creating those additional connections and making it easy for users to stretch IMDb beyond its own website are also very important to Web 2.0.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Ari: Thanks for the comment. Here&#8217;s my take on Web 2.0:</p>
<p>Though the &#8220;Web 2.0&#8243; term <a href="http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/oreilly/tim/news/2005/09/30/what-is-web-20.html" rel="nofollow">wasn&#8217;t coined until late 2005</a>, the aspects and features of Web 2.0 websites existed long before then.</p>
<p>Yelp, which started in 2004, is an excellent example of a site that epitomizes those features. The site depends on audience interaction and user-generated content to survive. Without that discussion and ever-evolving content, Yelp would have died long ago. Also, an important aspect of Web 2.0 in my mind is that the site must continue to grow and develop with the times. As mobile browsing has become more popular, Yelp has launched a mobile version. People wanted to share their Yelp reviews on other websites, so Yelp developed review widgets for users to place anywhere. It&#8217;s things like this that help solidify Yelp&#8217;s existence in the Web 2.0 space.</p>
<p>As for a site like IMDb, I believe that many of the key features are there (discussion topics, user created movie lists, ratings and reviews), but where I see them lacking is the interaction with the rest of the online world. They do have great interaction with their own audience, but I would like to see tie-in&#8217;s between IMDb and FriendFeed, Facebook, Twitter or other social sites out there. Creating those additional connections and making it easy for users to stretch IMDb beyond its own website are also very important to Web 2.0.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ari</title>
		<link>http://mikethoughts.com/2008/05/18/yelping-all-over-town/#comment-12</link>
		<dc:creator>Ari</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 May 2008 18:39:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://miketempleton.info/?p=13#comment-12</guid>
		<description>Good suggestion Mike. I&#039;ve been yelping for a year now. I&#039;m curious by your definition of it as a Web 2.0 site, as it&#039;s existed for several years. Would you call the IMDb a Web 2.0 site too, as the two are not very unlike?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Good suggestion Mike. I&#8217;ve been yelping for a year now. I&#8217;m curious by your definition of it as a Web 2.0 site, as it&#8217;s existed for several years. Would you call the IMDb a Web 2.0 site too, as the two are not very unlike?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
