EM-LND-12 · Landscape · W2
Services and infrastructure landscape
Links between consumer services, applications, instances, infrastructure and operational responsibility.
Partially published; research continues
Claude: complete-frozen-study-and-audit; Grok: complete-browser-study.
Published results
Research note, in Russian: Canonical promotion remains held by the limits published with the profile.
Subject boundary and candidate types
- ServiceLandscape
- ServiceDependencyGraph
Deep research questions
- Which business outcome would the loss of a node disrupt?
- Which services share a common point of failure?
- Which links are merely assumed?
Verifiable invariants
- Service and instance are distinguished
- Topology has an observation date
- Incident is stored with its subject-domain owner
End-to-end acceptance scenario
Failure of a shared node yields a justified impact and highlights unconfirmed dependencies.
Negative case
A link to a server automatically proves the service's full dependency on it.
Approaches to compare
- Vercy composition and whole-object: a separate landscape object and delegation
- ArchiMate/ISO 42010: views, questions and representation rules
- Compare participant subject models and the practical assembly of a permitted context
Candidates in the live catalogue
- WM-XCT-039 · Managed IT Service Graph · 0.1.0-research.1 · installable
Semantic fit requires boundary research; a published model does not by itself complete this card.
Result requirements
Every card is executed together with the full research contract: definitions, fields and cardinalities, lifecycle, sources, data mastership, rights, the five object facets, at least eight invariants, positive and negative examples, dependencies, migration and applicability limits.