"Virtual" is usually just a synonym for "computer-mediated" these days; sometimes, it is simply supposed to mean "digital." The term is a little nebulous, and it is used without any theoretical foundation. Like some others, therefore, I consider it a useless term.
"World" is a bit harder to deal with...
"A world of any ontological status contains a set of entities (objects, persons) organized and interrelated in specific ways (through situations, events and space-time). A world as a system of entities and relations, is an autonomous domain in the sense that it can be distinguished from other domains identified with other sets of entities and relations. . . . Worlds, whether fictional, possible, or actual, are hence distinguishable from one another." -- Ruth Ronen, Possible Worlds in Literary Theory, p. 8.
"Ostensively, there are countless discernible worlds: those of opera, baseball, surfing, stamp collecting, country music, homosexuality, politics, medicine, law, mathematics, science, Catholicism. . . . Some worlds are small, others huge; some are international, others are local. Some are inseparable from given spaces; others are linked with sites but are much less spatially identifiable. Some are highly public and publicized; others are barely visible. Some are so emergent as to be barely graspable; others are well established, even well organized. Some have relatively tight boundaries; others possess permeable boundaries. Some are very hierarchical; some are less so or scarcely at all. Some are clearly class-linked; some (like baseball) run across class. But note that the activities and communications within these worlds focus differentially around mat-[page break] ters intellectual, occupational, political, religious, artistic, sexual, recreational, scientific; that is, social worlds are characteristic of any substantive area." -- Anselm Strauss, "A Social World Perspective," pp. 121-22.
Ronen's definition comes from logic and philosophy; Strauss's is about what he calls "social worlds," or areas of study. People who use the term "virtual world" seem to *think* they're using it in Ronen's sense, but I think Strauss's sense is the more realistic. I currently prefer the term "online digital environment." This allows us to skip (and, eventually I hope, to obviate) the false terminology of the "virtual" as something separate from the real as well as the false terminology of the "world" as something separate from the real world.
So, umm...in answer to your question: no, because I prefer to think of "virtual" and "world" as bad words.