October 27, 2004
when i was in 5th grade, when people asked me what i wanted to be when i grew up, i would say "archeologist".
it wasn't that i actually wanted to lay about in the sand and dig things up. it was that i enjoyed being able to say (and understand) a word that was much too long and complicated for such a little kid. i liked impressing people with my vocabulary. show-off!
much to my surprise, i have in fact become an archeologist to some degree.
researching the UI for a tool my department is writing is a lot like archeology. there's a lot of buried information that i have to locate, tease to the surface, and collate in a way that will be meaningful. is there already an unspoken editorial policy? do templates already exist in some form? will i ever solve the eternal mystery of why so few rules are ever enforced on the web site? dig, dig, dig. i'm amazed at what i uncover.
Posted by lisa at October 27, 2004 11:31 AM | TrackBack
I like that job title/explanation. At one point, I tried to think of a job title that includes all the sides of who I was and I couldn't find anything good: researcher, documentarian, planner, information organizer...archiologist could sort of fit in there too.
Posted by: Dallas on October 27, 2004 02:01 PM
i think the official trend is to call someone like me (and possibly you) an "Information Architect", which is supposed to encompass web development, usability studies, UI design, and information design. Unfortunately, I find that title to be rather vague and misleading and I haven't tried to introduce it in my department. It's too easy to confuse with "Site Architect", which I am not.
Posted by: lisa on October 27, 2004 02:28 PM