experiment: separate conversation from workspace

docs/design-evolution-log.md

@@ -125,12 +125,77 @@ Can grouping the interface into cognitive work zones make the wider canvas feel
 Hypothesis:
 A workspace organised around what the investigator is doing will feel more coherent than one organised around equal cards or equal columns.
 
-Change:
-Arrange existing components into three visibly related zones:
+Result:
+Partially confirmed.
 
-1. Active work
-2. Shared understanding
-3. Reference and record
+Learning:
+
+The workspace feels more coherent when organised into cognitive work zones rather than a simple document stack.
+
+However, another distinction emerged that is more important than the zones themselves.
+
+The interface naturally separates into two different modes:
+
+• the active conversation between investigator and facilitator
+
+and
+
+• the shared workspace describing the current understanding.
+
+Unexpected learning:
+
+History feels incorrect when treated as reference information.
+
+History is actually the continuation of the investigator's conversation.
+
+Every response immediately becomes history.
+
+The notebook should therefore grow naturally from the Response area.
+
+The Investigation Status card currently competes with the Current Investigation card.
+
+The current question is the primary focus.
+
+Status is supporting context.
+
+Decision:
+
+Keep the cognitive-zone concept.
+
+Refine the zones around conversational flow instead of card grouping.
+
+Next question:
+Can the workspace clearly separate conversation from shared understanding?
+
+### Experiment 03 — Conversation versus Workspace
+
+Hypothesis
+
+Investigators think in two simultaneous modes.
+
+Mode 1:
+The conversation.
+
+Question
+↓
+
+Response
+↓
+
+History
+
+Mode 2:
+The shared workspace.
+
+Status
+
+Understanding
+
+Situation
+
+Map
+
+Separating these should make the interface feel more like a facilitated investigation than a collection of cards.
 
 Evaluation:
 Pending visual review.