RE: the relationship between CM and IA(information arc hitecture)

> I disagree. I think that the opinion you put forth perfectly
> describes UI - user interface - but not IA - information
> architecture.  

I agree with your disagreement. ;o)

Obviously, part of this debate hinges on how broadly/explicitly we defind
Information Architecture. The PDF Sri links to is a nice overview of the of
the broad definition and how IA is a part of all parts of a web development
project.

> So we can all use the same language, or at least so every knows what
> I mean when I say UI and IA, my definition is that UI talks about the
> look and feel, the "skin", while IA talks about how information is
> organized, metatagged, searched for, and located.   

Right. UI and CM are pretty much separated, using IA as the overlapping
'middle-man'.

That said, I don't think IA is really part of the CMS product. It's part of
the CM planning and, eventually, how the CMS is set up, but I'm not sure
what IA specific features a CMS really needs other than the ability to
categorize content in a variety of ways including metadata storage.

Which, I think, is what you are saying here...

> That said, I think that CMS's have not made assumptions with IA. You
> can pretty much set up any IA you want and as long as you (the
> business user) and the end user can perform the four actions above,
> you are golden. But since a WCM CMS forces output architecture
> assumptions compared to an IDM CMS, some IA choices may have been
> forced to create a kludged solution to a created purely by the CMS
> itself.   

-Darrel
--
http://cms-list.org/
please trim your posts.