Web Services mean less Alt-Tabbing
Amazon and Google's leadership in the implementation of Web Services confirms that their innovation wasn't a one-off ("use the web to sell books", or "rank based on links") but is part of their culture. This week, Alex Shapiro, chief technology officer of TouchGraph, was quoted by Margaret Kane saying that:
In a way, Amazon and Google are outsourcing their user interface development, with the developers working for free.
[ ZDNET, "Google, Amazon take lead in Web services" ]
Applications built using these Web Services range from the whimsical (e.g. 6 Degrees of Kevin Bacon) to the commercial (e.g. this camera store). Amazon and Google provide the services - others provide the front-end.
The Shapiro quote reminded me of a paragraph in Alan Mather's e-Government at Large blog in which Alan lists "Seven 'stops' of e-Government", and one 'stop' is:
Stop building websites. The world probably does not need anymore and governments certainly do not. If you have one, that is enough. If you have more than one, start a plan to get back to one. Think how much easier it will be to focus on delivering content that is relevant to the citizen if you don’t have to piece it together from hundreds or even thousands of websites. If your people can’t find the service, they won’t use it.
[ e-Government at Large, 8 November ]
Just like Amazon and Google only need one website, a government needs only one website. The corollary, keeping Google and Amazon in mind, is that governments need Web Services. Alan has excellent credentials in this area, working for the UK Office of the e-Envoy which leads the world in government Web Services. But he displays a healthy scepticism here:
I'm increasingly bothered that the new new thing (to quote Michael Lewis) becomes the be all and end all. But what matters still is "the perfect service". Please don't tell me that I need new new things to deliver services that match those criteria? Surely if Amazon can sell books with what it has today, I can deliver e-government services without a whole load of new new things? We've not even scratched the surface of delivering content managed websites with personally tailored information, let alone giving updates on services via mobile phone text messages? And now I have to build/buy/borrow/steal some web services? Agh.
[ e-Government at large, 18 November ]
But drill into the sentence "if Amazon can sell books with what it has today, I can deliver e-government services without a whole load of new new things". Question: what is it that Amazon has today? It has a vast searchable catalog, useful features such as wish-lists, and a payment system. All can, and are being exposed as Web Services. What Amazon also has is a website. The Web Services may be little known now, but who's to say that they won't be more important than the website over time?
I guess that tax submission Web Services are the "getStockQuote" of the e-Government world, but wouldn't it be useful if applications like Peachtree Accounting or Sage Instant Accounts could file tax information using Web Services. The government then concentrates on the provision of services. This would mean - no searching through a government website, no ALT-tabbing [i've forgotten what the Mac equivalent is!] between an accounting package and a government portal, and less hassle all round.
|
