[Sigia-l] IA system components - add to the list!

[Boniface Lau]

> From: sigia-l-admin at asis.org [mailto:sigia-l-admin at asis.org]On
> Behalf Of Coon, Sean
>  
[...]
> 
> If taxonomy development (or navigation to information objects from
> either a "top down" or "bottom up" approach) isn't an artifact of an
> information architecture process, what is it an artifact of then?

An artifact of a classification process.


[...]
> Is your position that the present espoused definitions of IA are too
> broad or too narrow?

I don't know which definition(s) you are referring to.


> What is your definition?

To me, information architecture is the structural specification of a
system's information space.


> 
> Your comments once again make me feel that there is a real need for
> a definition of the field.

Several years ago when I read the first edition of the book
"Information Architecture for the World Wide Web", I had a distinct
impression that the authors were trying to stake out a territory.

But what the book presented had little to do with the territory. Since
then a lot had happened in web development and more books came out
with information architecture title. But very little were really about
information architecture for the web.

Thus, I am not sure that now is the time to define the field.

May be before defining the field, people need to call what they
produce by the right name. If we cannot do that, we have little hope
of consistently producing the right thing, let alone defining the
field.


[...]
> I'd just be terrified if a business were attempting to write job
> descriptions based on this thread.  Even as a freelancer, getting in
> the door to work in a slotted "IA" role would be more difficult
> without clarity and consensus across the board.

Properly naming what we produce goes a long way towards reducing
mis-communications.


Boniface