How do you label an optional moving illustration so it cannot be mistaken for a technical assessment or approval? This is a communication question, not a request for inspection, repair, engineering or safety advice.

Imagine a fictional handout that contains a short decorative diagram alongside written instructions. A contributor proposes a moving highlight to direct attention to a paragraph, while the instructions themselves still need an independent review. The highlight is only an illustration: it does not show the condition of an actual structure and it does not establish that any repair is suitable or complete.

I work on SVG Animation and AI assisted this question. Our browser tool for animated svg can help create motion for a vector graphic, but it cannot verify the accuracy of a technical document or replace the judgment of a qualified professional.

One approach would be to label the graphic as a draft, keep it visually separate from the instructions, and add a caption explaining that its movement illustrates the reading order rather than a real procedure. The caption could also identify the version and the person responsible for the text review. If movement is disabled, a static equivalent should remain clear.

Would a short caption beside the illustration be enough for a reader to distinguish it from an approved document, or would you also put a draft label on the document itself? I would be interested in practical wording that keeps a visual aid separate from the underlying technical decision.