I'm sure with Yukon we'll learn if this (Information_Schema views) was an idea that will die on the vine. In the meantime, Books Online indicates that this is the preferred method. We'll see:

"Information Schema Views

Microsoft® SQL Server™ 2000 provides two methods for obtaining meta data: system stored procedures or information schema views.

Note To obtain meta data, use system stored procedures, system functions, or these system-supplied views only. Querying the system tables directly may not provide accurate information if system tables are changed in future releases.

These views provide an internal, system table-independent view of the SQL Server meta data. Information schema views allow applications to work properly even though significant changes have been made to the system tables. The information schema views included in SQL Server conform to the SQL-92 Standard definition for the INFORMATION_SCHEMA.

SQL Server supports a three-part naming convention when referring to the current server. The SQL-92 standard also supports a three-part naming convention. However, the names used in both naming conventions are different. These views are defined in a special schema named INFORMATION_SCHEMA, which is contained in each database. Each INFORMATION_SCHEMA view contains meta data for all data objects stored in that particular database. This table describes the relationships between the SQL Server names and the SQL-92-standard names.

"