SIGIA-L Mail Archives: Re: SIGIA-L: Info Architects
Re: SIGIA-L: Info Architects
From: James Weinheimer (jamesw_at_princeton.edu)
Date: Tue Apr 18 2000 - 15:26:17 EDT
I sympathize with the idea of trying to control the meaning of "Information
Architecture", but the only way other fields have done it is to control who
becomes one. "Lawyer" "Dentist" "Internist" are good examples. Those titles
actually mean something.
I am a librarian, and although I have gone through a degree program and
as one for many years, it is still unclear to me exactly who is a librarian,
and exactly what it is they do. The reason is that "librarianship" has never
been controlled to the same extent as the fields above.
If we want to try to control the meaning of the term, we must control the
field. This is rather daunting at this stage. Angela Picard mentioned the
solution to this problem: a training program. This could be like the
engineers" from Microsoft. This is a very long term goal, but a very
Charles Dowdell wrote:
> A number of years ago I took a course at Rochester Institute of Technology
> called 20th Century Information Design. During this course I discovered
> what I believed to be the future, "Information Architecture". In
> particular, I was captivated by thoughts by Richard Saul Wurman, Will
> Burtin and many others. I have been following these visions since.
> I eagerly anticipated the "Defining Information Architecture" conference
> Boston and was pleased with the information and turnout.
> My main question remains unanswered however,
> **If the title "Information Architect" is to endure, how can we prevent
> title from being watered down. How can the title and function be protected
> from casual and trendy use?**
> Charlie Dowdell, PhD in Progress.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2
: Sun Nov 23 2003 - 22:54:19 EST