[Sigia-l] Findability

[Chris Striker]

> I believe to remedy this situation we must first and foremost adhere to
> and support an austere 'purity of language' -- both grammatically and
> logically. In short we require a 'perfect appropriateness' of words to
> their meaning (semantics). Of how high a value I deem this has already
> been stated on this list.

The Tao that can be written is not the Tao. In other words, there is no such
thing as purity and perfection when it comes to language. To recognize this
is not to endorse consumerism. It is to accept compromise and vagueness as a
necessary aspect of language. We generalize, and analogize, and categorize,
because we must. The hard constraints of time and matter force shortcuts;
the alternative is cognitive gridlock. The idealist in each one of us seeks
purity, spins wheels, and does nothing - the realist makes do with what's
"good enough."

> Let me say that again -- things are more valuable for being rare!

Yes - and all things are valuable, as all things are unique. Most of the
time, however, things are "valuable enough" without consideration of their
total rarity. There is a time and place for ultimate truth. For most people,
this is not while surfing the web.

> At best, the Information Architect's intense *over-categorization* of
> everything to facilitate 'finding' is an approximation of mental bombast
> *disproportionate* to such knowledge and the value of the objects
> described.

Some might suggest that other types of disproportionate mental bombast
compromise effective communication even further.