Finding interactive experiences

Review record: the browsing heading is approved. Interactive Demo, Product Configurator and Interactive Experience are already approved type names. They share a visible entrance in the library. It does not ask you to approve those names again.

Answered 5 October 2026: recommendation accepted. The recorded decision settles this choice. Exact definitions and implementation remain separate work.

Keep a visible entrance for work people can use

Recommendation: keep Interactive & Digital Experience as a browsing heading. Use it to help people find experiences they can operate, including demonstrations and configurators. A product-related example can also appear through its product and other relevant research paths. This heading does not become a mandatory parent above every piece or a rule for choosing an analysis pipeline.

Checked example: Storylane's How to capture HTML demo presents a guided, clickable demonstration. During this review, clicking its hotspot moved to another captured screen, where a step counter and Next control explained the next action. The demonstration uses captured images with interactive controls. Its usefulness is not explained by calling it only an image or only a video.

Counterexample: a video recording of someone using that demonstration remains a video recording. It may document the interactive work, but watching it does not let the viewer operate the original. Likewise, an ordinary article does not become an Interactive Experience simply because its links and page navigation are clickable. Exact type definitions still need to state what substantive interaction qualifies.

Alternative: place the product demonstrations and configurators under Product & Feature, and find other interactive work through its existing context. This reduces the number of prominent entrances. It makes interaction less visible as a research path, however, and a non-product experience may be harder to discover. I recommend the shared entrance because it answers a useful question across subjects: what can a person explore or operate?

What changes downstream: browsing may bring together an original experience and evidence documenting it, while keeping their identities clear. An image, recording or captured page can describe or show the experience without proving how the complete experience behaves. Analysis must state what was actually inspected. Product links, campaign membership, interaction descriptions and publication context remain separate facts. Search and saved trackers should preserve those distinctions; collection must not infer working interaction from a screenshot.

What is already decided, and what is not

Your approval of the individual type names carries forward. Useful parts can remain linked to their source, and different research paths can reach the same work. The Interactive Kiosk placement is already answered: its primary home is Interactive & Digital Experience, with a second Retail & Commerce entrance. The broader interactive-work heading and the kiosk placement are now both answered.

The original heading card described the database as if all three labels were registered in particular families. Selected live checks did not support that description. The evidence note records the discrepancy. That is an implementation issue to reconcile after the audit, not a reason to ask whether your approved types should exist again.

No further answer is needed for the heading. Approval covers this browsing choice only. It does not settle all interactive definitions, storage, capture capabilities or pipeline behavior.

The review desk keeps the higher-priority pending packets together. Their order is unchanged.

Last reviewed 5 October 2026.