It does. Just start calling federated and decentralized services web 3. This stuff is actually useful so it'll out live the block chain pyramid schemes.
as much as I truly despise the current "web 3 is blockchain" trend, I do kinda think "web 3" as "decentralized" works. blockchains are just in vogue (in a big way, to web 3's significant loss) because of a couple unicorns.
maybe this is "web 2.5"? federation brings significant advantages from both centralized and decentralized, while not being fully either.
Which is why I don't think it fits with "web 3 as decentralization", yeah. It's fundamentally different from either, but we lack integers between 2 and 3, and I doubt web 4 would take off.
To my knowledge "web 3" is a very vague term that just means "users host their own content instead of relinquishing it to big tech for hosting". So I think it's fair for federation to count as web 3. Even with a blockchain-heavy net, ad-hoc federation will happen in the form of custodian services.
The top result is Wikipedia, "Web3, also known as Web 3.0,[1][2][3] is an idea for a new iteration of the World Wide Web that incorporates decentralization based on blockchains.[4]"
And even then, with federated services you still usually aren't hosting your content, that's really closer to what web 1.0 was, imo.
I guess the term is still nascent enough for it's meaning to be in flux. Hopefully good people are pushing it to align with the best tendencies
