Classifying Web 2.0 as Design as well as Function

Richard from nostrich.net wrote recently:

I’ve got a tip for you, that might be news to some people. There are many, many ways you could go about building yourself a “Web 2.0” layout but none of these get it. There’s a step missing. You need a “Web 2.0” service first.

To which I say, “phooey.”

Though, I would never claim to be a design “guru” or of any high authority to decide “what makes good design”, I do know one thing for sure. If enough sites have a similar style, use similar design elements such as bold colors, gradients, drop shadows, lots of contrast, etc, etc, etc, it’s probably safe to categorize them.

Now, because a plethora of “Web 2.0” services popped up, all using similar design style, does that mean that other non-services such as blogs, or project sites can’t use those design elements? Of course not. So, why can’t “Web 2.0 Design” be used to label those sites that adopt those design elements?

I say it can. But, Who am I? Nobody. I think someone out there that is someone can back me up on this and either, acknowledge the influx of people using these “trendy web 2.0esque” and coin a new term for it, or help make those who oppose comply with what is obvious.

http://mentalized.net/journal/2005/10/10/building_your_very_own_web20_layout/

— 2006-06-28