The Value of "IA" or Whatnot, was Re: [Sigia-l] The New Nielsen?

[Thomas Vander Wal]

From: "christina wodtke" <cwodtke at eleganthack.com>

 > my point continues to be: this stuff is complex.  easy answers are 
probably
 > incomplete.  Absolute statements are probably untrustworthy. I suspect we
 > are only beginning to understand what the web is about. Is it a library?

 > A software platform? A gallery? A message board? This article begins the
 > thinking... http://www.lab404.com/media/ but we are  long way from
pinning
 > it down, and I'm not sure if we will. We can pin down what we choose 
to do
 > with it at any given moment, that's why I champion the specific
 > understanding of the nature of your own work without trying to
 > over-generalize it out. Where that line is between application of 
relevant
 > knowledge and over-generalization, I'm not sure.

The light from this whole discussion falls on not only the complexity, 
but the bound relationship between the provider of information and the 
user/audience.  I can only imagine discussions in the publishing 
regarding what constitutes a book: Must not have pictures, but if it 
does the few pictures must be sketches; Must have a hard cover; There 
must be a table of contents; etc.

The matter of it is, it all depends.  The problem I have is when I find 
generalized statements stated in concrete terms by guru-types that frame 
their (sometimes/often errant) pontifications in expansive terms when 
the facts only apply to specific cases.  Knowing context in these cases 
is far more helpful when tied to the expansive commands than the bare 
expansive statements that are provide causal damage to professionals 
than help.  Digging out from broad proclamations that are more often 
mis-used seems to be what we do when certain people make statements 
aimed at a narrow audience, but do not define that narrow context by 
leaving the parameters of use open or worse claim no parameters.

It would be nice, in an ideal world to have site/enterprise type 
metadata term that the industry could use to classify statements for use.

Something like broad commerce site, small information repository, mobile 
use, etc. This could help to tag Jakob's broad spoutings when the only 
valid use for his pontification are pony contraception sites that use 
Flash (yes that is made up, but could be worth a Google search). 
Knowing context would help all of us, as we often look for answers based 
on contextual use.

Just a thought.