Taxonomy for IA?

15 Feb 2010 - 5:29pm
4 years ago
3 replies
453 reads


I wonder if anyone has seen a taxonomy of topics IAs encounter in
their work? For example, internet marketers deal with email
marketing, search marketing, and social media. I'm not having much
luck finding taxonomy for IAs.

Thanks for any ideas.


15 Feb 2010 - 6:14pm

Use the Google External Keyword Tool:

Use the site method, type in, and you'll come up with some good
ones that might help you.

I haven't seen a list, but if you go back through many of the job postings,
you'll find a bunch of related descriptions.

:: Tony Zeoli
:: Founder
:: Digital Strategy Works
:: Web Experience that works for you

:: Tel: 917.705.4700
:: az at <>
[image: AIM:] djtonyz [image: Skype:] tonyzeoli [image: MSN:] djtonyz [image:
Google Talk:] djtonyz [image: Y! messenger:] anthonyzeoli
[image: Linkedin] <>[image:
Twitter] <>
Digital Strategy Works Digital Strategy Works co-hosts 20dot20 with Habitat

15 Feb 2010 - 7:29pm

Fascinating Tony, thank you. Here's what I get from this method, in
no particular order or hierarchy with some duplication:

user experience design
mobile devices
graphical user interfaces
interaction design
data modelling

creating user interfaces
card sorting

best practices
learning new interfaces
content management

soa (?)

I also searched the same keyword tool for "information

If anyone has any ideas about how they would sort and add to this
very rough outline, I'd welcome the input. If it helps, I want to
create a set of topics that I can use to publish content about IA so
my IA readers can find information in 3-10 useful buckets.

Thanks, Tony. Appreciate any other input, too!

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Posted from the new

15 Feb 2010 - 8:02pm
Matthew Belskie

This looks like an interesting exercise, and it's one that is oddly
apropos to my MSIS course-work; two semesters ago I took Information
Architecture and I am currently in a Knowledge Organization seminar
where we have just covered Linnaeus.

Looking at @TimSlavin's post I am very much reminded of Vickery's
"Classification and Indexing in Science". Appendix A of his work
is dedicated to a discussion of the historical aspects of the
classification of science, and his conclusions seem evident in the
above list - I forwarded it to my Knowledge Organization professor
and said it looked to me more like a taxonomy specific to a webpage

And there's nothing wrong with that because it is probably a
reaction to an historical trend (or, a concept that has lately been
percolating in my mind, natural selection of knowledge).

But I think that a taxonomic methodology that doesn't take a wide
historic view of IA will fail to miss the larger brush-strokes of the
field, and consequently fail to miss some of the wider classifications
and hierarchies within the field.

I think that it is also fair to say it is worth figuring out which
taxonomic approach might be the best fit for the field. Do we go for
the IA equivalent Linnaean Taxonomy or go the phylogenetic systemics
(cladistic) route?

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Posted from the new

Syndicate content Get the feed