I'd like to propose the term inforaction to define the combined ability of an entity to inform and allow interaction. The best example is SourceForge: users typically look for projects and read documentation about them, and they also interact with the project by posting bug reports and feature requests (among others). Hence, SourceForge provides open-source projects inforaction services.
In case you're wondering, yes, I'm aware "proposing a term" is pretty lame - that's why I haven't referenced this page from anywhere (I think it's probably just about as cheesy as the tone of ReedsLaw definition).
That said, I'll start checking [here] daily. :-)
And if you're curious why, I was writing a links page for [OPT] and found myself repeating "the most current list of links for information and interaction with this project" http://opt.lanifex.com/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OutreachProjectToolLinks and http://opt.lanifex.com/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OutreachProjectToolFAQIntro. There.
I think you could take this idea further to make it more useful by suggesting inforaction is the ability of something to inform whilst interacting with the user. Otherwise, any bidirectional communication channel would suffice, which is an empty definition as that includes all UserInterfaces. I would further exclude secondary channels as counting. For instance, when you click the computer makes a sound (which is really dissociated from the event) informing you of a successful click. However, this isn't the same as being informed by the act of clicking itself. Learning how to ride a bike is inforaction as you learn how to balance by actually riding the bike. (Learning by doing) On the other hand, I would also expand the definition to include the VisualThesaurus' ability to teach connections between word meanings by letting the user float from node to node in a typically aimless fashion. Older adventure games (like Zork or Myst) would gradually describe the entire geographical space by letting the user navigate "room" by room. This is quite a different experience (progressive awareness) from having the entire map presented to the audience. Many hypertexts also work on this discovery principle.
One could criticize though that all texts are like this as well, as the audience can only perceive so much at a time. Consider a book: the reader can only read one page at a time, flipping one page as she reads it. This scenario has to be distinguished by the fact that the physical structure of the book is separate from the text itself. Thus, turning the page is not intrinsic to the information presented. Of course, this is not always true! (cf. CybertextPerspectivesOnErgodicLiterature.) -- SunirShah
Well, since you take it so seriously, I feel obliged to answer. As interesting as your dissertation is (because it really is), I doubt anybody would take the time to read such a lengthy definition for a word that doesn't actually exist after all (I understand you were merely suggesting a couple of ideas to expand the definition, and not trying to actually redefine the term, but redefining it along with all the nuances you suggest would result in a similarly long definition). Moreover, I believe in personal interpretation and evolution: imposing so many rules for a term from its inception would hinder its flexibility and limit its usability, hence reducing its potential spreading. I'd rather keep it simple for the time being and redefine, if necessary, as the term changes its meaning due to natural language evolution/selection.
That said, I couldn't agree more to your comments - that's the general idea I had in mind when I thought about the term, though I must admit I wouldn't have been able to put it into words so nicely. --BogdanStancescu