[Sigia-l] Less Spatiality, More Semantics?

• Next message: John O'Donovan: "Re: [Sigia-l] IA system components - add to the list!"
• Previous message: Nuno Lopes: "RE: [Sigia-l] IA system components - add to the list!"
• Next in thread: Peter Merholz: "Re: [Sigia-l] Less Spatiality, More Semantics?"
• Reply: Peter Merholz: "Re: [Sigia-l] Less Spatiality, More Semantics?"
• Maybe reply: Richard_Dalton_at_Vanguard.com: "Re: [Sigia-l] Less Spatiality, More Semantics?"
• Maybe reply: Richard_Dalton_at_Vanguard.com: "Re: [Sigia-l] Less Spatiality, More Semantics?"
• Maybe reply: Richard_Dalton_at_Vanguard.com: "Re: [Sigia-l] Less Spatiality, More Semantics?"
• Maybe reply: John O'Donovan-INTERNET: "RE: [Sigia-l] Less Spatiality, More Semantics?"
• Reply: Christopher Fahey [askrom]: "RE: [Sigia-l] Less Spatiality, More Semantics?"
• Reply: Jesse James Garrett: "Re: [Sigia-l] Less Spatiality, More Semantics?"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

In his provocative panel presentation for the fourth IA Summit in Portland, "Wayfinding and navigation is digital
spaces" Andrew Dillon took the field of Information Architecture to task for it's fixation on "spatiality" as the
primary navigation model/metaphor, and suggested that we would do well to spend more effort creating navigation systems
based on the harder, but 'neglected' area of "semantics."

(He also said he didn't think this was really defensible, which I presume means it was intended to generate debate and
provide food-for-thought. It did and it has, done both for me since Saturday.)

To be honest, at first I thought this was intended as a joke. I mean, for as long as I can recall we have bickered among
ourselves over the "meaning and interpretation" (i.e. semantics) of the words Information Architect(ure)!!!!

And then I thought, 'what the heck else are the results of card sorting exercises and taxonomy creation BUT creating
navigation systems based on semantics (at least insofar as the meanings of words are in part determined by their
relation to other words)

After mulling this over, I've decided I don't really understand what Andrew 'meant' (heh) by his use of the word
'semantics' AT ALL.

I'd be interested in people's thoughts.

-cc

------------
When replying, please *trim your post* as much as possible.
*Plain text, please; NO Attachments

ASIST IA 03 Summit: Making Connections
http://www.asist-events.org/IASummit2003/

Searchable list archive: http://www.info-arch.org/lists/sigia-l/
________________________________________
Sigia-l mailing list -- post to: Sigia-l_at_asis.org
Changes to subscription: http://mail.asis.org/mailman/listinfo/sigia-l

• Next message: John O'Donovan: "Re: [Sigia-l] IA system components - add to the list!"
• Previous message: Nuno Lopes: "RE: [Sigia-l] IA system components - add to the list!"
• Next in thread: Peter Merholz: "Re: [Sigia-l] Less Spatiality, More Semantics?"
• Reply: Peter Merholz: "Re: [Sigia-l] Less Spatiality, More Semantics?"
• Maybe reply: Richard_Dalton_at_Vanguard.com: "Re: [Sigia-l] Less Spatiality, More Semantics?"
• Maybe reply: Richard_Dalton_at_Vanguard.com: "Re: [Sigia-l] Less Spatiality, More Semantics?"
• Maybe reply: Richard_Dalton_at_Vanguard.com: "Re: [Sigia-l] Less Spatiality, More Semantics?"
• Maybe reply: John O'Donovan-INTERNET: "RE: [Sigia-l] Less Spatiality, More Semantics?"
• Reply: Christopher Fahey [askrom]: "RE: [Sigia-l] Less Spatiality, More Semantics?"
• Reply: Jesse James Garrett: "Re: [Sigia-l] Less Spatiality, More Semantics?"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Sun Nov 23 2003 - 22:55:41 EST