mcavic - 9:03 pm on Jan 6, 2007 (gmt 0)

what looks like a url

That is the correct use of the term "url". It's not "an url", which would be pronounced "an earl"

I thought hits were the number of requests made to a server, not the number of files downloaded.

In my opinion, yes. Graphics, 301's, 404's, etc, are hits too, although the confusion might come when someone is tabulating statistics, they may prefer to count files of a specific type, or even sessions, rather than hits.

The term "Web 2.0" seems an appropriate addition

Yes, and that's something else that has no precise definition, because it's not a concrete technology. It's not as if Web 2.0 [en.wikipedia.org] obsoletes Web 1.0.

For example, I would consider WebmasterWorld a Web 2.0 site, because it consists almost entirely of dynamic user-contributed content. But others may say it's not because it's "just" a forum, and forum technology has been possible since the very beginning of the Web.