[Sigia-l] RE: Web Standards and I.A.s

[Lyle_Kantrovich at cargill.com]

Thomas,

You seem to have taken my terse comments as a dismissal of Web Standards 
- sorry if I wasn't clear enough.  You make some good points, and I 
agree with the spirit of what you've said.  My points were the 
following:

1) Information Architecture goes beyond Web (sites and applications on 
all types of platforms and devices)
2) Web Standards do little to standardize the practice of IA or the 
Information Architectures that Info Architects create.

I did NOT say (and wouldn't say):
1) IAs shouldn't embrace Web Standards
2) Standards don't matter

I'm a strong proponent of web standards and have championed validation 
and compliance on internal development teams, with tool vendors, and in 
public forums.  Web Standards helped make the web what it is today, and 
only by leveraging standards (official and de facto ones) can we 
continue to build powerful platforms for information technology in the 
future.

> Web standards are for the top level presentation structure and 
presentation.
> IAs, at least most I know work on information structures, which are 
the
> foundation for web sites, applications, enterprise information 
systems, etc.

Markup languages indeed provide some structure for content.  HTML's Hx 
headings for example - but heading tags don't provide a *heading system* 
for an information system, they only provide a way to delineate what is 
a heading and what level of heading it is.  As I'm sure you know, IA 
involves much more than document level structure.  

> Taking the
> taxonomy we developed for the structural elements in our evaluation of 
the
> information and having that taxonomy for the structure used by the
> developers and having that vocabulary used by developers is actually
> practicing what we IAs preach.

You make a good point that IAs who can speak a common language with 
developers are more effective.  That's very true in my experience - but 
that concept also applies beyond developers.  The common language might 
be technical (programming language, web standards), methodological (RUP, 
UCD, project management) or business (marketing, branding).  What 
"common language" is most important for an IA to speak: Java, RUP, Brand 
or ROI?  What should an IA's first language be?  A technical one or a 
business oriented one?

CSS Zen Garden is an awesome site (and an example I've been using in a 
class I teach for some time) - but in my opinion CSS relates more 
closely with Interaction Design and Visual Design than Information 
Architecture.  IA is more than interaction and visual style.  Do IA's 
practice ID and VD (unfortunate acronym that one)?  Sure they do, but 
CSS is still just a tool in a toolbox.  It's like a scalpel to a doctor 
- it's useful, but in and of itself it doesn't make the doctor very 
effective - as a matter of fact, it can do more harm than good in the 
wrong hands.  Which brings up my next point: I can develop applications 
that validate against every standard that exists, but that doesn't mean 
that the IA is a good one or that the system is very usable or useful.  

The upshot of all of this is really that web standards are great - good 
IAs will promote and comply with standards.  But they are not a silver 
bullet.  And if I'm "picking the right battles" - I'm going to battle 
for IA practices and User Centered Design and leave the "we need to be 
100% 508 compliant" battle for a much later day, even though I care a 
lot about accessibility.  The reality is that 508 compliance has a lot 
less business value (in my industry) than building a good navigation 
system or search system - and we are always working with limited 
financial, time and political resources.

Web standards are too low level to really be considered a major *IA 
tool*.  Most architects have to develop their own internal 
(project/application/enterprise) standards and patterns for IA 
components and systems.  Those standards may be implemented and coded 
using technical platform standards like Web Standards, but those 
technical standards only help just so much.



Most building architects won't argue against electrical building 
standards, but you'll never convince anyone that building standards make 
it easy to design a good home or office building.  And sure, architects 
need to be able to talk to the construction folks using a common 
language, but it's probably more important (to a successful end product) 
that they be able to dialog with the folks who need the building built 
or who will use it.

IA work goes beyond document structure (i.e. markup), interaction, and 
visual styles and addresses with bigger structures (e.g. taxonomy) and 
semantics -- Web standards don't go very far in those areas.

I think we're in "violent agreement" on this one.  You're saying the 
glass is half full and I'm saying it's 90% vacant (even though it 
validates).  :)

Regards,

Lyle

----
Lyle Kantrovich
User Experience Architect

Croc O' Lyle - Personal Commentary on usability, information 
architecture and design.
http://crocolyle.blogspot.com/