[Sigia-l] Findability is dead, Long live ummm... Meaning?

[Jesse James Garrett]

Well, I sure am glad to see this topic get some traction -- as both
Peters know, and as I mentioned in the "first principles" thread not too
long ago, the notion of IA as facilitation of understanding has been on
my mind for more than a year now.

Peterme wrote:
> Supporting "understanding" is really hard to define. It's squishy. Vague.
> Easy to interpret in a number of different ways. This doesn't mean we
> shouldn't try; it means that we should expect this to be a long, hard,
> arduous process. 

Just because it's squishy doesn't necessarily mean it's difficult. Many,
many creative professionals deal with squishy and vague every day and
produce successful work. Squishy might seem difficult, though, if one
tries to handle it as if it's not squishy.

We are artisans, too often trying to get by with the methods of engineers.

Peter Morville wrote:
> Also, in my experience, most understanding comes from reading *found*
> documents or using *found* applications, though some understanding can
> come from the surrounding structure and relationships

I think the point that has agitated so many imaginations is that more
understanding comes about through structure than this profession has
generally acknowledged. The argument I've been putting forth is that,
throughout human history, meaning has always been communicated through
structure -- why should electronic media be any different?

Certainly, finding plays a big role in understanding. But finding is not
where the user's interest ends. It shouldn't be where ours does either.

________________________________________________________________________
Jesse James Garrett                                   Now in bookstores:
jjg at jjg.net                            "The Elements of User Experience"
http://www.jjg.net/                         http://www.jjg.net/elements/