Difference between revisions of "Web2.0"
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
User-centric approach to a web application. The accumulated data that such an approach gathers might be better managed in separate user area - the user has their own area of the database. | User-centric approach to a web application. The accumulated data that such an approach gathers might be better managed in separate user area - the user has their own area of the database. | ||
| − | * The [ | + | * The [http://beta.richtags.net/ Richtags project] have produced a wonderful interface to multiple repositories to facilitate social interaction. |
* Connotea (Nature) already has an established EPrints user interface component | * Connotea (Nature) already has an established EPrints user interface component | ||
| − | * ULCC has the [ | + | * ULCC has the [http://sneep.ulcc.ac.uk/ SNEEP project] and the [http://www.linnean-online.org/ Linnaean society repository]. They have been developing comments and bookmarking facilities. |
Revision as of 16:34, 13 December 2007
Outcomes from the Web 2.0 Pow-wow 13th December 2007
User-centric approach to a web application. The accumulated data that such an approach gathers might be better managed in separate user area - the user has their own area of the database.
- The Richtags project have produced a wonderful interface to multiple repositories to facilitate social interaction.
- Connotea (Nature) already has an established EPrints user interface component
- ULCC has the SNEEP project and the Linnaean society repository. They have been developing comments and bookmarking facilities.
