The correct approach is to design a centralized, channel-agnostic content model using Content Fragments. This core AEM capability allows for ‘create once, publish everywhere’ (COPE), ensuring a single source of truth for product information and brand messaging. This model can then be adapted and delivered to various channels (web, mobile, email, kiosks) via APIs, maintaining consistency while allowing for presentation flexibility. Other options either create content silos, address only the presentation layer, or focus on process rather than architecture.

A common performance pitfall with Experience Fragments is that, by default, they are included in pages via a server-side include (SSI) or similar mechanism that can cause a separate, synchronous request to the publisher for each fragment on a page. This creates multiple serial HTTP calls, significantly increasing page load time. The solution is to leverage caching strategies, consider asynchronous loading, or use a headless delivery model where fragment content is bundled in a single API response. The other options describe issues that are not specific or fundamental to the Experience Fragment architecture.

AEM’s core versioning system is editor-agnostic. Whether a content author makes a change via the traditional page editor, the content fragment editor, or in-context editing (via the editor’s ‘Save’ action, not ‘Stage’), AEM will create a new version of the affected page or component. This immutable version history is a standard, out-of-the-box feature for compliance and rollback purposes. Timewarp is for viewing past states, not creating versions, and workflows or special configurations are not required for this basic functionality.

The most maintainable and scalable approach is to leverage AEM’s inherent page hierarchy as the single source of truth for navigation. The out-of-the-box Navigation component (and its variations) automatically traverses the page tree structure, generating menus based on the actual parent-child relationships of pages. This ensures navigation is always in sync with the site structure. Authoring a page in a specific location automatically includes it in navigation. Creating separate structures (like Content Fragment hierarchies or XML files) introduces redundancy and a high maintenance burden.

AEM’s ‘Launch’ or ‘Publish’ action only manages the AEM content (the page structure and default content). Personalized experiences and offers are managed within Adobe Target’s own workflow and activation system. For a personalized experience to go live, it must be created, approved, and activated within Target to the corresponding environment (e.g., the Production host group). Failure to do this is a common oversight. The AEM-Target integration focuses on delivering the context and placeholders; the activation of specific experiences remains a Target activity.

Multi-Site Manager (MSM) and the Live Copy/Blueprint relationship is the core AEM feature designed specifically for this scenario. A global ‘Blueprint’ site contains the common structure, components, and baseline content. Country-specific sites are created as ‘Live Copies’ of this blueprint. This allows for centralized rollout of global changes (like a header component update) while granting local teams the ability to override and create unique content where needed. This is far more efficient and maintainable than managing independent sites or complex sync processes.

The correct, architectural approach is to use AEM’s template editor and Component Policies (formerly known as Design configurations). Within a template’s policy for a specific component, you can disable specific in-context editing features (like the text edit toolbar or the asset drag-and-drop) while keeping others enabled. This allows the architect/developer to define the intended authoring experience declaratively, guiding authors to use the component dialog for structured input. This is more sustainable and user-friendly than administrative edicts or disabling useful functionality altogether.

The best practice is to implement a Sling Model (or a similar backend logic class) that acts as the component’s business logic layer. This model should use the injected `ResourceResolver` or `PageManager` to programmatically and adaptively find the banner pages based on a configurable path (which can be set in the component’s dialog). This keeps the HTL template clean and focuses on presentation, while the Java code handles the data retrieval logic. It’s more robust, reusable, and testable than hardcoding paths in HTL or building separate servlets.

The CIF ‘Navigation Core Component’ is the out-of-the-box solution for this requirement. It is designed to query the commerce backend (via GraphQL) to retrieve the category tree and render it as a site navigation menu. It handles the dynamic nature of commerce categories, which may change independently of the AEM page hierarchy. While a custom component could be built, the CIF Navigation component provides this functionality in a configurable, reusable, and supported manner. The Product List component is for listing products, and the Breadcrumb component is for showing the user’s path.

The correct approach is to design a centralized, channel-agnostic content model using Content Fragments. This core AEM capability allows for ‘create once, publish everywhere’ (COPE), ensuring a single source of truth for product information and brand messaging. This model can then be adapted and delivered to various channels (web, mobile, email, kiosks) via APIs, maintaining consistency while allowing for presentation flexibility. Other options either create content silos, address only the presentation layer, or focus on process rather than architecture.0