[ID Discuss] IA Article: Rose by any other name...

[Andrei Herasimchuk]

The Boxes and Arrow archives seemed to be screwed up, so I'm posting a  
response to this article here in the hopes it might in a round about  
way get back to B&A.

The article can be found here:  
http://www.boxesandarrows.com/archives/ 
information_architecture_a_rose_by_any_other_name.php

I guess I'm left with two questions after reading this article:

1) If you replaced the word "information architect" and "IA" with  
"interface designer" and "UI" would you have the same article? If so,  
then why not just use those terms instead of constantly referring to  
the job as "IA" throughout the article?

2) I think the author somewhat neglects the issues on who makes the  
final decisions in any design. After all, in the business world,  
someone has to be accountable and make the final call. The real  
question here, how do titles and job function also affect the decision  
making process on a project?

If a self-proclaimed IA has no background or training in visual design,  
should they make the final call on what icons, typogrpahy and color  
systems to use? Would the author mind if a self-proclaimed UX person  
told them that the entire taxonomy proposed was simply wrong, when it  
seems quite clear that UX person had little background or trianing in  
that sort of work?

Andrei Herasimchuk
andrei at adobe.com

work: http://www.adobe.com
personal: http://www.designbyfire.com