Horn, R. (1999). Information Design. In Jacobsen, R. (Ed.), Information Design, pp. 15–33. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Annotated Bibliography
In his article on Information Design, Horn describes how the profession of information design has come to exist. He notes that it is still a growing field that is struggling to define and differentiate itself from the various professions it has grown from. Horn defines Information Design as "the art and science of preparing information so that it can be used by human beings with efficiency and effectiveness." He describes three primary objectives for an information designer. One is to create documents that are easily understood and translated into the correct action, the other is to design interactions with equipment that are instinctive and comfortable. The final objective is to "enable people to find their way... with comfort and ease."
Some of the pioneers in the information design field such as Florence Nightingale and William Playfair were inventors who used graphs to visually display information and make it more comprehensible. Universalists are those that believe a "purely iconic language could substitute in certain situation such as travel for normal spoken language." This is in the hopes of creating a language that could be universally understood, but such languages have yet to catch on except a few symbols in the area of travel.
As the field has evolved, so too has literature on the topic. The literature now includes visual dictionaries, notably one by Thompson and Davenport (1980), instruction manuals, and popular books. Researchers in a variety of fields have contributed knowledge to information design, though they write about it using a variety of terms. Because the field is so "recently self-conscious" Horn says that few information designers are aware of the research being done in their own field.
Horn describes tension between the different groups that contribute to the field of information design. Graphic designers focus on aesthetic, Technical Communicators care about simplicity and comprehensibility. Likewise the Profession itself has some tension with amateurs who can create graphs and charts with the current tools without years of experience and education.
The use of graphics and visual aids is becoming more and more prevalent. Information designers need to build their field and become more self aware in order to continue to develop the field through research and developing shared good practices.
My Thoughts
Emerging fields must reach a point where they coalesce under a unified banner, or even split into a variety of named groups. Is there ever a point where people sit down and create a sort of organizational chart that shows where each field is subsumed and what it is called? Is is better for a field to become more established and organized or does that stifle some of the creations that could come about in the grey areas that are done away with when distinct categories are created?