What has been reasonably suggested, I think, is that there is a continuum of products: some of them require more IA than others, some require more IxD than others. In the same way some projects require more visual design than others. Your objection seems to be that I dared say that the products that require more IA are mostly web-based.
If I were to reduce interaction design to interface design, we would never hear the end of it.
My objection is that you put forth a similarly retrograde notion of IA, and have not bothered to acknowledged how that field has evolved.
I've not seen a reasonable argument against this assertion yet. The Polar Bear Book is "information Architecture for the World Wide Web" and the Blueprints book is called "Blueprints for the Web." Don't Make Me Think is a "web usability" book. Where is the "Information Architecture for Devices" book? Or "Information Architecture for Physical Spaces" book?
Peter Morville's Ambient Findability and Adam Greenfield's Everyware are both largely about information architecture in devices and spaces, whether explicit (in Peter's book) or implicit (in Adam's).
--peter ________________________________________________________________ Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)! To post to this list ....... [email protected] Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help
