Did Google get the idea of using [subject matter] experts to structure [and give meaning to] information for improved findability from the Wikipedia 3.0 article? or as a pure and natural evolution of their thinking? or both?
In case you’re taking it literally, both the question and the title of the post are purely rhetorical at this point, now that Google seems to be on its way to adopting (or co-opting) the Web 3.0 vision.
Here is an excerpt from the newly announced Google Co-Op experiment:
Google Co-op gives you a way to improve search in the topics you know best. If you’re a doctor, for instance, with specific expertise in a particular disease, you can contribute by using the labels in the health topic to annotate all the webpages that you know provide useful, reliable information about that disease. Your patients and other Google users could then subscribe to you and benefit from your expertise.
You can participate in a number of topics that are already being worked on, such as health, destination guides, autos, computer & video games, photo & video equipment, and stereo & home theater. Or, if you’re passionate about something entirely different, go ahead and start a topic of your own. In this guide, we will walk you through an example of how to label webpages for an existing topic as well as how to create a topic of your own.
Semantic Web, Web strandards, Trends, OWL, innovation, Startup, Evolution, Google, GData, inference, inference engine, AI, ontology, Semanticweb, Web 2.0, Web 2.0, Web 3.0, Web 3.0, Google Base, artificial intelligence, AI, Wikipedia, Wikipedia 3.0, collective consciousness, Ontoworld, Wikipedia AI, Info Agent, Semantic MediaWiki, DBin, P2P 3.0, P2P AI, P2P Semantic Web inference Engine, Global Brain, semantic blog, intelligent findability, Google Co-Op