.cross.wired.mind.

Here are two posts made on the IAI mailing list:

02/28/06 

I have often said that the practice of IA is like anthropology in that at the core of our discipline is a set of common concerns - organization, categorization, and navigation.  To me its all about the semantic relationships expressed in the information spaces we design.  Each area of practice (web 1.0, web 2.0, apps, physical spaces, virtual worlds, hypertext, etc.) has its own special approach to organization, categorization and navigation.  To me they are the core.

03/01/06

I think that organization, categorization, and navigation (maybe that should be wayfinding) are fairly distinct, as long as it is clear that we are talking about the evaluation of semantic distance and relationships in an infospace.  I have not encountered another discipline places semantics at the center like IA does.  Navigation is the only aspect of our core concerns that I see as being “shared” with other design disciplines, but when it comes right down to it the heart of navigation is the crystallization of semantic relationships into a means of wayfinding.  Interaction design and visual design also claim a stake in the design navigation systems, but their role tends towards the more mechanical and experiential aspects of navigation and not the structure created by a navigation system.

As to the question - should we care if other discipline lay claim to our core concerns?  No, not really.  Look at sociology and anthropology.  Here are two disciplines that share many core facets.  They are both concerned with the study of macro relations formed by humanity yet each discipline uses a slightly different approach and has slightly different methods.