{"schema":"https://ver.cy/schemas/card/1.0.0","id":"vr.wm-xct-029","code":"wm-xct-029-obligation-commitment","url":"https://ver.cy/models/wm-xct-029-obligation-commitment/","name":"Obligation / Commitment","alternateNames":[],"kind":"world-model","status":"published","version":"0.3.0-research.1","language":"en","classifiers":{"family":"World Models","category":"Cross-cutting context","entryKind":"mixin","plane":"","domain":["XCT.OBL"],"industry":["Cross-industry"],"navPath":"NAV.XCT.OBL","tags":["obligation","commitment","xct.obl"],"facets":{}},"whatItIs":"WM-XCT-029 models a single obligation/commitment instance as a mixin that can be attached to any host record that creates or carries duties (contract clause, statute or regulation article, licence, court or administrative order, service commitment, internal policy, unilateral promise). It covers the deontic core (bearer, counterparty, modality, action), the conditional structure that detaches the duty, the temporal structure (due time, recurrence, grace, limitation), the lifecycle state model, fulfilment and its evidence, non-performance with excuse and remedy, the authority and provenance that make the duty defensible, and transfer, plurality and standards alignment. It deliberately does not model the instrument, the parties, the executed work or the accounting recognition; those are referenced from sibling models.","purpose":"Provide a reusable, format-neutral structure for a directed deontic commitment: which party owes which action or forbearance, to whom, under which conditions, by when, to what standard, how it is discharged, and what follows if it is not.","scope":{"in":["Deontic modality of a single duty (obligation, prohibition, correlative right) and whether it is violable rather than definitional","Bearer/obligor, obligee, beneficiary, auxiliary and enforcing party roles for one commitment","Obligated action or forbearance, its controlled action term, refinements and subject matter or target","Antecedent and resolutive conditions, detachment, and the constraint expressions that gate the duty","Due instant or performance window, recurrence, grace, notice, survival and limitation periods","Lifecycle states and transitions with separate event time and observation/ingestion time","Fulfilment criteria, acceptance, discharge mode, partial performance and measure of progress","Fulfilment evidence, its issuer, integrity and status","Non-performance determination, excuse grounds, cure periods, remedy and penalty obligations","Legal or policy basis, issuing authority, jurisdiction and governing law of the duty","Record ownership, stewardship, provenance and audit trail of the obligation record","Assignment of the correlative right, transfer or novation of the duty, plurality of obligors/obligees and apportionment","Confidentiality classification, personal-data flags, retention and legal hold on obligation records","Crosswalk to ODRL Duty, LegalRuleML Obligation, FIBO contractual commitment, IFRS 15 performance obligation and compliance-obligation registers"],"out":["The agreement or contract instrument itself, its formation, offer/acceptance, consideration and clause text","Legal-entity identity, registration, legal capacity and party master data","Generic policy containers and rule engines, including access-control decision points and their evaluation infrastructure","Execution of work: tasks, work orders, scheduling, resourcing and dispatch","Payment initiation, clearing and settlement mechanics and ledger postings","Accounting recognition and measurement of liabilities, provisions and revenue amounts","Dispute, arbitration and litigation case management","Risk registers, control design and control-effectiveness testing","Consent capture and consent lifecycle as a lawful basis","Calendar, holiday and business-day-convention definitions themselves","Definitional or structural necessities that cannot be violated","Signature, sealing and e-signature ceremony records"],"boundaries":[{"neighbor":"Agreement / Contract model","distinction":"An agreement is a negotiated understanding reflecting offer and acceptance of commitments; a commitment is a promise by one party to act or refrain. One agreement carries many obligations, and an obligation can exist with no agreement at all (statute, court order, unilateral commitment, commitment at large). This model references the instrument and never restates its terms."},{"neighbor":"Policy / Rule container (ODRL Policy)","distinction":"ODRL places Duties inside a Policy, either as a policy-level obligation or as a pre-condition duty on a Permission. This mixin sits at the Rule/Duty level, not the container level; the policy grouping, conflict strategy and inheritance belong to the policy model."},{"neighbor":"Right / Entitlement model","distinction":"A right is the reciprocal aspect of a commitment and is borne by a different party; LegalRuleML models a Right as a permission to a bearer that implies obligations on auxiliary parties. The correlative right is referenced, not duplicated, so that assignment of the right and transfer of the duty stay separable."},{"neighbor":"Prohibition","distinction":"A prohibition is violated by performing the act, an obligation by failing to perform it. The modality and violation polarity are recorded here, but negative-duty enforcement semantics (remedy on infringement) differ from consequence semantics on unfulfilled duties and must not be collapsed."},{"neighbor":"Task / Work item model","distinction":"A task is an execution artefact. Several tasks may contribute to discharging one obligation, and tasks exist with no obligation behind them. Progress measurement is carried here only as a discharge measure, not as work scheduling."},{"neighbor":"Liability / Provision (accounting)","distinction":"IFRS 15 performance obligations are only promises to transfer distinct goods or services to a customer; obligations outside that definition fall to other standards. Recognition, measurement and presentation of the financial effect are out of scope and belong to a financial-reporting model."},{"neighbor":"Constraint / Condition expression model","distinction":"ODRL defines Constraint as leftOperand/operator/rightOperand and LogicalConstraint as and/or/xone/andSequence. This model references those expression structures and their operand vocabularies rather than redefining operators."},{"neighbor":"Compliance requirement register / control model","distinction":"A compliance management system maintains a register of obligations the organisation must or voluntarily chooses to meet. That register is a collection-level and programme-level concern; this model describes one obligation entry and does not carry control design or assurance results."},{"neighbor":"Definitional (alethic) business rules","distinction":"SBVR separates alethic necessities, which cannot be violated even in principle, from deontic obligations, which may be violated although they ought not to be. Structural necessities must not be represented as obligations in this model."},{"neighbor":"Provenance model","distinction":"PROV-O supplies the entity/activity/agent vocabulary for how the obligation record came to be. This model aligns to it and carries the minimum provenance fields inline; the full provenance graph belongs to the provenance model."}]},"distinguishingFeatures":["Models one duty instance with bearer, counterparty, modality and action, attachable to any host that creates duties.","Differs from a contract or policy, which contain obligations, and from a task, which is work to do.","Records the conditions that trigger the duty, its due schedule and fulfilment evidence.","Differs from an accounting provision, which values a liability."],"structure":{"bundles":[{"id":"deontic-core","name":"Deontic Core and Parties","description":"What kind of duty this is, who it identifies, who bears it and to whom it is owed. This is the irreducible core that every host record mixing in WM-XCT-029 must populate.","layers":[{"id":"identity-and-designation","name":"Identity, Versioning and Designation","description":"How one obligation is identified, versioned, and distinguished from the instrument that creates it and from the dated occurrences it generates.","findings":[{"id":"obligation-identity","name":"Obligation identity, versioning and occurrence distinction","description":"An obligation record needs a stable identity that survives amendment, is distinct from the clause or article that created it, and is distinct from each dated occurrence of a recurring duty. ODRL requires an IRI uid on a Policy and permits one on each Rule; LegalRuleML identifies statements so that associations, temporal characteristics and penalties can be attached to them. The identity rule must also state what makes two records the same obligation, because obligation data is typically extracted from documents by more than one process.","questions":[{"text":"Which system is the authoritative master for this obligation's identifier, and under which governed identifier scheme is it issued?","id":"q-master-identifier","kind":"identity"},{"text":"Does the identifier denote the standing obligation or one dated occurrence of a recurring duty?","id":"q-standing-vs-occurrence","kind":"identity"},{"text":"When the obligation is amended, is the same identity versioned or is a superseding obligation created and linked?","id":"q-amendment-identity","kind":"provenance"},{"text":"What deterministic rule decides that two extracted records describe the same obligation?","id":"q-duplicate-rule","kind":"validation"}]}]},{"id":"deontic-classification","name":"Deontic Modality and Obligation Typology","description":"The modal character of the duty and the classification axes that change how it is evaluated, measured and enforced.","findings":[{"id":"deontic-modality","name":"Deontic modality and violability","description":"The statement must be typed as an obligation, a prohibition, a permission or a right, because each has different violation conditions: LegalRuleML makes an obligation violated when the state or act is not achieved and a prohibition violated when it is achieved, and models a right as a permission to a bearer implying obligations on auxiliary parties. SBVR further separates deontic rules, which may be violated, from alethic necessities, which cannot; conflating them produces unenforceable or nonsensical obligation records.","questions":[{"text":"Which deontic modality does this statement carry, and which vocabulary term expresses it?","id":"q-modality","kind":"classification"},{"text":"Is the statement violable in principle, or is it a definitional necessity that cannot be breached?","id":"q-violability","kind":"classification"},{"text":"Is violation triggered by omission of the action or by performance of it?","id":"q-violation-polarity","kind":"constraint"},{"text":"Which correlative right does this commitment create, and which party holds it?","id":"q-correlative-right","kind":"relationship"}]},{"id":"obligation-typology","name":"Obligation typology: achievement, maintenance, result and effort","description":"Several orthogonal axes change evaluation. Achievement commitments are discharged by bringing about a condition, whereas maintenance commitments require a state to be kept true over an interval. UNIDROIT separates a duty to achieve a specific result from a duty of best efforts and gives criteria for determining which applies. Obligations are also primary or secondary (arising from breach of another), and only a subset of promises meet the IFRS 15 test of a distinct performance obligation.","questions":[{"text":"Is this an achievement obligation with a completion condition or a maintenance obligation over a state held across an interval?","id":"q-achievement-maintenance","kind":"classification"},{"text":"Is the obligor bound to achieve a specific result or only to exercise best efforts, and on what basis was that determined?","id":"q-effort-standard","kind":"classification"},{"text":"Is this a primary obligation or a secondary obligation arising from breach of another?","id":"q-primary-secondary","kind":"classification"},{"text":"Does this promise qualify as a distinct performance obligation for revenue-recognition purposes?","id":"q-performance-obligation","kind":"decision"},{"text":"Is the obligation externally imposed or a commitment the organisation voluntarily set for itself?","id":"q-obligation-origin-class","kind":"classification"}]}]},{"id":"party-roles","name":"Bearer, Counterparty and Enforcement Roles","description":"The party structure of a directed commitment: who is bound, who is owed, who benefits, who may enforce or release.","findings":[{"id":"obligor-bearer","name":"Obligor, capacity and delegated performance","description":"FIBO defines the obligor as the party bound legally or by agreement to do or refrain from doing something; LegalRuleML calls this the Bearer. ODRL adds a hard constraint that the party obligated to perform a duty must have the ability to exercise the duty action. Accountability must be separated from performance: delegating execution to an agent or subcontractor does not by itself move the duty.","questions":[{"text":"Which party bears the obligation, and under which authoritative party identifier is it recorded?","id":"q-bearer-identity","kind":"identity"},{"text":"Does the bearer have the capability and legal capacity to exercise the obligated action?","id":"q-bearer-capacity","kind":"constraint"},{"text":"Is performance delegated to another party, and does the bearer remain accountable for it?","id":"q-delegated-performance","kind":"ownership"},{"text":"Can one party hold both obligor and obligee roles for the same obligation, and what validation prevents that?","id":"q-role-conflict","kind":"validation"}]},{"id":"obligee-beneficiary","name":"Obligee, beneficiary and enforcement authority","description":"FIBO defines the obligee as the party to whom a commitment is owed and the beneficiary as the party that profits from it; the two can differ. FIBO also recognises a commitment at large made without direct involvement of the potential beneficiaries, which is why an identified obligee cannot be mandatory. ODRL expresses these roles as assigner and assignee function terms and allows a party collection refined by constraints. The right to enforce, waive or release must be recorded separately from the right to benefit.","questions":[{"text":"To whom is the obligation owed, and is that an identified party or a refined class of parties?","id":"q-obligee-identity","kind":"identity"},{"text":"Is there a beneficiary distinct from the obligee, and what does the beneficiary receive?","id":"q-beneficiary-distinct","kind":"relationship"},{"text":"Is this a directed commitment or a commitment at large with no identified beneficiary?","id":"q-directedness","kind":"classification"},{"text":"Which party is entitled to enforce, waive or release this obligation, and may it do so unilaterally?","id":"q-enforcement-authority","kind":"authority"}]}]}]},{"id":"obligation-content","name":"Obligated Content, Conditions and Standards","description":"What must actually be done, on what subject matter, under what conditions, to what standard and in what quantity.","layers":[{"id":"action-and-subject-matter","name":"Obligated Action and Subject Matter","description":"The controlled action or forbearance and the asset, sum, information or place it operates on.","findings":[{"id":"obligated-action","name":"Obligated action term, refinement and forbearance","description":"ODRL requires exactly one Action on every Rule, requires every action term other than use and transfer to declare an includedIn parent reaching use or transfer transitively, and allows refinements that narrow the action, with a caution that refinement should not reduce the action to a null operation. LegalRuleML admits a state, an act or a course of action as the object of a deontic specification, which is what allows forbearances and standing conduct rules to be expressed.","questions":[{"text":"What exactly must be done or forborne, expressed as a single controlled action term?","id":"q-action-term","kind":"definition"},{"text":"Which action vocabulary governs the term, and to which broader action does it roll up?","id":"q-action-vocabulary","kind":"interoperability"},{"text":"What refinements narrow the action, and has the refined action been checked against becoming a null operation?","id":"q-action-refinement","kind":"constraint"},{"text":"Is the obligated behaviour a single act, a course of action, or the maintenance of a state?","id":"q-act-or-course","kind":"classification"}]},{"id":"subject-and-place","name":"Target subject matter, place and currency of performance","description":"ODRL binds rules to a target Asset, optionally an AssetCollection refined by constraints, and warns that refinement should not yield an empty set. UNIDROIT supplies the default place of performance, the payment rules and the currency rules where the parties are silent. Many statutory duties have no asset at all, so the target must be optional on a duty even though ODRL requires exactly one target on permissions and prohibitions.","questions":[{"text":"What asset, resource, information item or sum of money is the target of this obligation?","id":"q-target-subject","kind":"composition"},{"text":"Where must performance occur or be delivered, and is that place stated or defaulted?","id":"q-place-of-performance","kind":"spatial"},{"text":"If the obligation is monetary, in what currency and by what mechanism must it be discharged?","id":"q-currency-and-payment","kind":"measurement"},{"text":"If the target is a collection, what refinement identifies its members and has the resulting set been checked as non-empty?","id":"q-collection-non-empty","kind":"validation"}]}]},{"id":"conditions-and-triggers","name":"Conditions, Detachment and Constraint Expression","description":"The conditional structure that makes a duty become due, lapse or never arise, and the formal expressions used to state it.","findings":[{"id":"antecedent-and-detachment","name":"Antecedent condition, detachment and interference","description":"Most commitments are conditional: the duty exists but only becomes due when its antecedent holds. UNIDROIT distinguishes a suspensive condition, which delays effect, from a resolutive condition, which terminates it, imposes a duty to preserve the other party's rights while the condition is pending, and makes improper interference with the occurrence of a condition actionable. ODRL expresses the equivalent gate as constraints that must all be satisfied. Detachment is an observable event and must be timestamped and attributable.","questions":[{"text":"What antecedent must hold before the obligation becomes due, and is the condition suspensive or resolutive?","id":"q-antecedent","kind":"constraint"},{"text":"What observable event or data proves the antecedent is satisfied, and which party asserts it?","id":"q-detachment-evidence","kind":"evidence"},{"text":"What follows if a party improperly prevents or brings about the occurrence of the condition?","id":"q-condition-interference","kind":"exception"},{"text":"Is the obligation unconditional, that is, is its antecedent constantly true?","id":"q-unconditional","kind":"state"},{"text":"What must each party do while the condition is still pending?","id":"q-pending-duties","kind":"requirement"}]},{"id":"constraint-expression","name":"Constraint and logical-constraint expression form","description":"ODRL defines a Constraint as exactly one leftOperand, exactly one operator and either a rightOperand or a rightOperandReference, optionally with unit and dataType, and defines LogicalConstraint over existing constraints with the operands and, or, xone and andSequence, requiring order preservation for andSequence. Multiple constraints on the same rule are a conjunction. An obligation model that stores conditions as free text loses all of this and cannot be evaluated.","questions":[{"text":"How is each condition expressed as left operand, operator and right operand, with unit and datatype where needed?","id":"q-constraint-form","kind":"definition"},{"text":"How are multiple constraints combined: conjunction, disjunction, exclusive-one or ordered sequence?","id":"q-constraint-composition","kind":"composition"},{"text":"Which operand and operator vocabulary is authoritative, and what must a processor do with terms it does not recognise?","id":"q-operand-vocabulary","kind":"interoperability"},{"text":"How is an unsatisfiable or self-contradictory constraint set detected before the obligation is activated?","id":"q-unsatisfiable","kind":"validation"}]}]},{"id":"standards-and-measurement","name":"Performance Standard and Quantification","description":"The quality bar the performance must meet and the quantity or progress by which discharge is measured.","findings":[{"id":"performance-standard","name":"Quality of performance and conformity assessment","description":"Where an instrument does not fix quality, UNIDROIT requires performance of a quality that is reasonable and not less than average in the circumstances, so an obligation record must state whether the standard is express or defaulted. Practical obligations add thresholds, tolerances and a named conformity assessor. Note that this finding has only partial primary support: the service-level-objective structure normally used here derives from cloud SLA standards that could not be retrieved, so thresholds are modelled generically.","questions":[{"text":"What quality or service standard must the performance meet, and is that standard express or defaulted?","id":"q-quality-standard","kind":"quality"},{"text":"What threshold or tolerance separates conforming from non-conforming performance?","id":"q-tolerance","kind":"measurement"},{"text":"Who determines conformity, and by what test or method?","id":"q-conformity-assessor","kind":"validation"},{"text":"When the referenced standard changes mid-life, does the new version apply to open occurrences?","id":"q-standard-change","kind":"temporal"}]},{"id":"quantification-and-progress","name":"Quantity owed, partial performance and measure of progress","description":"Discharge is often quantitative. UNIDROIT lets the obligee refuse a partial tender at the due time unless it has no legitimate interest in refusing, while IFRS 15 measures progress toward complete satisfaction of an obligation satisfied over time. ODRL supplies count and payAmount operands for quantity-based constraints. Outstanding balance must be derivable at any instant, which requires the fulfilled quantity to be recorded as an accumulation rather than a flag.","questions":[{"text":"What quantity, amount or count fully discharges this obligation?","id":"q-quantity-owed","kind":"measurement"},{"text":"Is partial performance permitted at the due time, and does it proportionally reduce the outstanding amount?","id":"q-partial-performance","kind":"constraint"},{"text":"By what method is progress toward complete satisfaction measured?","id":"q-progress-method","kind":"process"},{"text":"What is the outstanding quantity at a given instant, and how is it recomputed after each contribution?","id":"q-outstanding-balance","kind":"state"}]}]}]},{"id":"time-and-lifecycle","name":"Temporal Structure and Lifecycle","description":"When the duty bites, how often, for how long it remains enforceable, and the states it passes through.","layers":[{"id":"due-time-and-recurrence","name":"Due Time, Recurrence and Enforceability Window","description":"The instant or window for performance, its repetition, the tolerances around it, and the outer bound of enforceability.","findings":[{"id":"due-time-and-window","name":"Due instant, performance window and time basis","description":"UNIDROIT distinguishes a fixed time, a period within which the obligor may choose the moment, and performance within a reasonable time where nothing is fixed; that distinction changes when non-performance can be declared and must be a first-class field, not implied by the presence or absence of a due date. RFC 3339 requires seconds and an explicit offset or Z, and gives -00:00 a distinct meaning when the local offset is unknown. Legal deadlines stated in local civil time must retain their timezone and business-day basis, since an early conversion to a UTC instant destroys the legal meaning.","questions":[{"text":"What is the due instant or performance window, expressed with seconds and an explicit offset or Z?","id":"q-due-instant","kind":"temporal"},{"text":"Is the time fixed, a period within which the obligor may choose, or an unspecified reasonable time?","id":"q-time-basis","kind":"constraint"},{"text":"Which time zone, calendar and business-day convention adjusts the nominal due date?","id":"q-calendar-basis","kind":"interoperability"},{"text":"Where the deadline runs from a trigger event, what is the offset rule and from which event instant does it run?","id":"q-derived-due","kind":"process"}]},{"id":"recurrence-grace-notice","name":"Recurrence, grace periods and notice requirements","description":"Many commitments repeat on a rule rather than existing as one dated duty, so occurrences must be generated deterministically and remain individually addressable. Grace periods delay the declaration of non-performance without moving the due time. Notice duties are themselves obligations, often with their own lead times and recipients, and ODRL provides an inform action and informed-party function for exactly this shape. Amending a recurrence rule mid-life must not silently rewrite settled history.","questions":[{"text":"Does the obligation recur, and by what deterministic rule are its occurrences generated?","id":"q-recurrence-rule","kind":"temporal"},{"text":"What grace period runs after the due time before non-performance may be declared?","id":"q-grace-period","kind":"constraint"},{"text":"What notice must be given, to whom, and how far in advance, before the obligation bites or is enforced?","id":"q-notice-requirement","kind":"process"},{"text":"When the recurrence rule is amended, how are already generated and already settled occurrences treated?","id":"q-recurrence-amendment","kind":"exception"}]},{"id":"limitation-and-survival","name":"Limitation periods, survival and enforceability","description":"An obligation can be substantively owed yet no longer enforceable. UNIDROIT devotes a chapter to limitation periods, and LegalRuleML models temporal characteristics as pairs of time with a legal status and a status development, letting efficacy, applicability and enforceability be tracked separately. Survival after termination of the instrument is a distinct question from limitation. Both drive retention, since GDPR permits continued retention where necessary for the establishment, exercise or defence of legal claims.","questions":[{"text":"For how long after the due time does the obligation remain legally enforceable, and under which law is that period fixed?","id":"q-limitation-period","kind":"temporal"},{"text":"Does the obligation survive termination or expiry of the instrument that created it?","id":"q-survival","kind":"lifecycle"},{"text":"Which events suspend, interrupt or restart the limitation period?","id":"q-tolling","kind":"event"},{"text":"How does the enforceability window justify continued retention of the obligation and its evidence?","id":"q-retention-justification","kind":"retention"}]}]},{"id":"state-model","name":"Lifecycle State Model","description":"The permitted states of an obligation, the transitions between them and the timestamps that make the history reconstructible.","findings":[{"id":"lifecycle-state-machine","name":"Obligation states, transitions and dual timestamps","description":"An obligation moves through states that must be explicit rather than inferred: proposed, active but conditional, detached and due, in performance, partly fulfilled, fulfilled or discharged, breached, excused, waived or released, cancelled, transferred, expired and superseded. ODRL derives fulfilment from constraint satisfaction plus exercise of the refined action, and treats a duty as unfulfilled unless its consequences are also fulfilled; LegalRuleML makes Violation and Compliance explicit indications. Every transition needs both the instant the change legally took effect and the instant the system observed or ingested it, because these routinely differ for externally evidenced events. Maintenance commitments additionally need transient breach distinguished from terminal breach.","questions":[{"text":"Which states may this obligation occupy, and which transitions between them are permitted?","id":"q-state-set","kind":"lifecycle"},{"text":"Is state derived by evaluating conditions and evidence, or asserted by an authorised party?","id":"q-state-derivation","kind":"decision"},{"text":"How are the event time and the observation or ingestion time of each state change recorded separately?","id":"q-dual-timestamps","kind":"temporal"},{"text":"May an obligation return to an open state after being marked fulfilled, and on whose authority?","id":"q-reopening","kind":"exception"},{"text":"For a maintenance obligation, how is a transient lapse distinguished from a terminal breach?","id":"q-transient-breach","kind":"state"}]}]}]},{"id":"fulfilment-and-nonperformance","name":"Fulfilment and Non-Performance","description":"What discharges the duty and what happens when it is not discharged.","layers":[{"id":"fulfilment-and-discharge","name":"Fulfilment, Acceptance and Evidence","description":"The test for complete discharge, the role of obligee acceptance, and the evidence that proves performance.","findings":[{"id":"fulfilment-and-acceptance","name":"Fulfilment criteria, acceptance and discharge mode","description":"ODRL states that a duty is fulfilled if all its constraints are satisfied and its action, with all refinements satisfied, has been exercised, and that where the action has not been exercised all consequences must be fulfilled instead. IFRS 15 ties satisfaction to transfer of control, either over time or at a point in time. Acceptance by the obligee is a separate step from performance and must not be conflated with it; discharge can also occur by substitute performance, set-off, waiver or release, each of which is a different discharge mode with different evidential needs.","questions":[{"text":"What conjunction of conditions constitutes complete fulfilment of this obligation?","id":"q-fulfilment-test","kind":"definition"},{"text":"Does discharge require obligee acceptance, and within what period may acceptance be withheld?","id":"q-acceptance","kind":"process"},{"text":"By which mode was the obligation discharged: performance, substitute performance, set-off, waiver, release or expiry?","id":"q-discharge-mode","kind":"classification"},{"text":"When does control or benefit transfer, and does that instant determine discharge?","id":"q-control-transfer","kind":"event"}]},{"id":"fulfilment-evidence","name":"Fulfilment evidence, integrity and revocation","description":"An obligation record without evidence is an assertion, not a defensible fact. The Verifiable Credentials Data Model supplies the shape for competent, tamper-evident evidence: an issuer, a validity interval, a credential status for revocation or suspension, a proof and an explicit evidence property describing how the issuer verified the claims. PROV-O supplies attribution and the generating activity. Evidence must bind to the specific occurrence and quantity it discharges, and later revocation or correction must be able to reopen a settled state.","questions":[{"text":"What evidence is required to demonstrate performance, and who is competent to issue it?","id":"q-evidence-required","kind":"evidence"},{"text":"How are the integrity and authenticity of fulfilment evidence verified?","id":"q-evidence-integrity","kind":"security"},{"text":"How is each evidence item bound to the specific occurrence and quantity it discharges?","id":"q-evidence-binding","kind":"relationship"},{"text":"What happens when evidence is later revoked, corrected or found insufficient?","id":"q-evidence-revocation","kind":"exception"}]}]},{"id":"nonperformance-and-remedy","name":"Non-Performance, Excuse and Remedy","description":"Determining and declaring breach, the grounds that excuse it, and the secondary obligations it produces.","findings":[{"id":"breach-determination","name":"Non-performance determination and declaration","description":"UNIDROIT treats non-performance as failure to perform any obligation, expressly including defective performance and late performance, so a model that records only a missed deadline is incomplete. LegalRuleML marks Violation as an explicit indication attached to a deontic specification, and Compliance as its counterpart. Who may declare breach, whether formal notice is required, whether the breach is fundamental, and how a contested determination is held pending resolution are all separate decisions that must be recorded rather than derived.","questions":[{"text":"What form does non-performance take here: non-delivery, defective performance, or lateness?","id":"q-breach-form","kind":"definition"},{"text":"Who determines and declares breach, and is formal notice a precondition to remedies?","id":"q-breach-declaration","kind":"authority"},{"text":"Is the breach material or fundamental, and what threshold decides that?","id":"q-materiality","kind":"classification"},{"text":"How is a disputed breach determination represented while it remains unresolved?","id":"q-disputed-breach","kind":"state"}]},{"id":"excuse-remedy-consequence","name":"Excuse grounds, cure periods and consequence obligations","description":"UNIDROIT excuses non-performance for an impediment beyond the party's control under force majeure and provides a separate hardship regime for events fundamentally altering the equilibrium of performance. ODRL models the repercussions of not fulfilling a duty through the consequence property and the repercussions of infringing a prohibition through remedy, and expressly forbids a consequence duty from itself carrying a further consequence. LegalRuleML links a PenaltyStatement to a prescriptive statement through Reparation. Consequence and remedy duties are themselves obligations, so this model recurses onto itself.","questions":[{"text":"What grounds excuse non-performance, and what notice and proof does an excuse require?","id":"q-excuse-grounds","kind":"exception"},{"text":"Is there a cure period during which late performance still discharges the original obligation?","id":"q-cure-period","kind":"constraint"},{"text":"Which consequence or remedy obligations are triggered by non-fulfilment, and are they registered as obligations in their own right?","id":"q-consequence-obligations","kind":"composition"},{"text":"What formula, cap or ceiling limits penalties and damages?","id":"q-penalty-ceiling","kind":"measurement"},{"text":"May a consequence obligation itself carry a further consequence, and how is that reconciled with the exchange format's prohibition on nesting?","id":"q-consequence-nesting","kind":"validation"}]}]}]},{"id":"authority-and-governance","name":"Authority, Provenance and Record Governance","description":"What makes the obligation legitimate and defensible, who stewards the record, and how it is protected, audited and retained.","layers":[{"id":"legal-basis-and-jurisdiction","name":"Legal Basis, Authority and Jurisdiction","description":"The instrument and authority that create the duty and the legal space in which it operates.","findings":[{"id":"source-and-authority","name":"Source instrument, citation precision and issuing authority","description":"Obligations arise from contracts, statutes and regulations, licences, court and administrative orders, internal policies and unilateral commitments. FIBO models the contractual commitment as a provision of a contract, so a contractual obligation must cite its clause, not merely its instrument. LegalRuleML defines an Authority as a person or organisation with power to create, endorse or enforce legal norms. ISO 37301 treats obligations as spanning externally imposed requirements and commitments the organisation adopts voluntarily, which changes who may amend or withdraw them.","questions":[{"text":"Which instrument creates this obligation, and at what clause or article-level citation?","id":"q-source-instrument","kind":"provenance"},{"text":"Which authority issued or endorsed the norm, and does it have power to enforce it?","id":"q-issuing-authority","kind":"authority"},{"text":"Is the obligation externally imposed or a commitment the organisation set for itself?","id":"q-external-or-voluntary","kind":"classification"},{"text":"How is an amendment to the source instrument propagated to obligation records derived from it?","id":"q-source-change-propagation","kind":"process"}]},{"id":"jurisdiction-and-governing-law","name":"Jurisdiction, governing law and applicability window","description":"LegalRuleML defines Jurisdiction as a geographic area or subject matter over which an Authority applies its legal power, and models temporal characteristics with a legal status and status development, which is how efficacy, applicability and enforceability windows are kept distinct. The same factual duty can be governed by different law for different parties, and conflicting mandatory rules across jurisdictions must be recorded as a conflict rather than silently resolved.","questions":[{"text":"Which jurisdiction's law governs the obligation, and which forum resolves disputes about it?","id":"q-governing-law","kind":"authority"},{"text":"Over what territory or subject matter does the issuing authority's power extend?","id":"q-jurisdiction-extent","kind":"spatial"},{"text":"Where two jurisdictions impose conflicting duties, which prevails and how is the conflict recorded?","id":"q-jurisdiction-conflict","kind":"exception"},{"text":"During which period was the governing norm in force, applicable to this party, and enforceable?","id":"q-applicability-window","kind":"temporal"}]}]},{"id":"stewardship-and-provenance","name":"Stewardship, Accountability and Provenance","description":"Who is answerable for the obligation record and how its history is proved.","findings":[{"id":"ownership-and-accountability","name":"Record ownership, monitoring duty and review cadence","description":"A compliance management system keeps its obligations current and accessible to those who need them, which implies a named owner, a monitoring responsibility, a review cadence and an escalation route. These are distinct from the obligor: the party that owes the duty is often not the party that maintains the record about it. PROV-O's actedOnBehalfOf and qualified Delegation give the vocabulary for recording that separation without losing the chain of responsibility.","questions":[{"text":"Who owns this obligation record and is accountable for its accuracy and completeness?","id":"q-record-owner","kind":"ownership"},{"text":"Who monitors performance against this obligation and raises alerts before the due time?","id":"q-monitoring-duty","kind":"process"},{"text":"How often is the record reviewed for currency, and who attests that it is current?","id":"q-review-cadence","kind":"quality"},{"text":"What is the escalation path when the responsible party is absent, unresponsive or conflicted?","id":"q-escalation-path","kind":"exception"}]},{"id":"provenance-and-audit","name":"Record provenance, derivation and tamper-evident audit trail","description":"PROV-O supplies the minimum: which Agent the record is attributed to, which Activity generated it, which Entity it was derived from, and when that activity started and ended. For obligations extracted from documents by automated processes, the derivation link to the source clause is what makes the record contestable and correctable. Assertion time, event time and ingestion time must be kept apart, and the audit trail must be append-only if it is to be relied on after a dispute begins.","questions":[{"text":"Which agent and activity generated this obligation record, using which inputs, and when?","id":"q-generating-activity","kind":"provenance"},{"text":"How is a derived obligation traced back to the clause or rule it was extracted from, and with what confidence?","id":"q-derivation-trace","kind":"evidence"},{"text":"How are assertion time, event time and ingestion time distinguished throughout the audit trail?","id":"q-time-separation","kind":"temporal"},{"text":"Is the audit trail append-only and tamper-evident, and how is that demonstrated to a third party?","id":"q-tamper-evidence","kind":"security"}]}]},{"id":"confidentiality-and-retention","name":"Confidentiality, Access and Retention","description":"Classification, lawful basis, retention and deletion of obligation records and their evidence.","findings":[{"id":"access-and-retention","name":"Confidentiality classification, personal data and retention","description":"Obligation records routinely name individuals, so they attract data-protection constraints: storage limited to what is necessary, an identified lawful basis where processing is necessary for compliance with a legal obligation, and erasure rights that yield where retention is necessary for a legal obligation or for the establishment, exercise or defence of legal claims. Retention must therefore be justified by the enforceability window rather than set arbitrarily, and destruction must distinguish full deletion from tombstoning that preserves referential integrity.","questions":[{"text":"What confidentiality classification applies, and who may read, amend, close or export the obligation?","id":"q-confidentiality-class","kind":"access"},{"text":"Does the record or its evidence contain personal data, and on what lawful basis is it processed?","id":"q-personal-data","kind":"privacy"},{"text":"How long are the obligation record and its evidence retained after discharge, and on what justification?","id":"q-retention-period","kind":"retention"},{"text":"How do erasure requests interact with legal holds and defence-of-claims retention?","id":"q-erasure-vs-hold","kind":"exception"},{"text":"At end of retention, what is destroyed and what is tombstoned to preserve referential integrity?","id":"q-end-of-retention","kind":"decision"}]}]}]},{"id":"structure-and-interoperability","name":"Structure, Transfer and Interoperability","description":"How obligations relate to each other, how they move between parties, and how they map to external standards.","layers":[{"id":"composition-and-dependency","name":"Composition and Dependency","description":"Parent-child decomposition and interdependence between obligations.","findings":[{"id":"finding-composition-and-dependency","name":"Decomposition, order of performance and reciprocal dependency","description":"UNIDROIT fixes the order of performance where obligations are interdependent, and IFRS 15 asks whether a promise is distinct or so integrated with others that it cannot stand alone; both are decomposition questions with operational consequences. A parent obligation discharged only when all children are discharged behaves differently from an obligation merely grouped with others for reporting. Reciprocal dependency, where each party's duty is conditional on the counterparty's, is a common source of deadlock and must be represented explicitly, along with a check against circular dependency.","questions":[{"text":"Is this obligation decomposed into sub-obligations, and does discharging all children discharge the parent?","id":"q-decomposition","kind":"composition"},{"text":"What ordering or interdependency exists between this obligation and the counterparty's obligations?","id":"q-ordering","kind":"relationship"},{"text":"Is the obligation distinct and separable, or so integrated with others that it cannot be performed alone?","id":"q-distinctness","kind":"classification"},{"text":"How are circular or self-referential dependencies detected and prevented before activation?","id":"q-circularity","kind":"validation"}]}]},{"id":"transfer-and-plurality","name":"Transfer, Substitution and Plurality","description":"Movement of the duty or its correlative right between parties, and multi-party structures on either side.","findings":[{"id":"assignment-and-novation","name":"Assignment of rights, transfer of duties and novation","description":"UNIDROIT treats assignment of rights and transfer of obligations as separate regimes, alongside assignment of contracts as a whole; a right can usually be assigned more freely than a duty can be transferred, and transferring a duty raises whether the original obligor is released or remains bound. This directly determines identity continuity: a release-and-substitute novation is best modelled as a new obligation superseding the old, whereas a delegation of performance leaves identity intact. FIBO's commitment at large explains why some commitments are transferable as instruments in their own right.","questions":[{"text":"May the correlative right be assigned, and does the obligor's consent or notice condition the assignment?","id":"q-right-assignment","kind":"authority"},{"text":"May the duty be transferred, and is the original obligor released or retained as guarantor?","id":"q-duty-transfer","kind":"ownership"},{"text":"On transfer or novation, does the obligation keep its identifier or does a successor obligation take over?","id":"q-identity-continuity","kind":"identity"},{"text":"What instrument evidences the transfer, and from which instant is it effective against each party?","id":"q-transfer-evidence","kind":"evidence"}]},{"id":"plurality-and-apportionment","name":"Plurality of obligors and obligees, and apportionment","description":"UNIDROIT devotes a chapter to plurality of obligors and obligees, which is where joint and several liability, divided shares, contribution between co-obligors and solidary obligees are settled. A model that stores a single obligor reference cannot express a syndicate, a consortium, a group of guarantors or a class of claimants, and cannot compute who may be pursued for how much. Apportionment must also carry a default rule for the common case where the instrument is silent.","questions":[{"text":"Where several parties are bound, is liability joint and several or divided into shares?","id":"q-liability-mode","kind":"relationship"},{"text":"How are shares apportioned, and what is the default when the instrument is silent?","id":"q-share-apportionment","kind":"constraint"},{"text":"May the obligee demand full performance from any one obligor, and what contribution follows between co-obligors?","id":"q-full-demand-and-contribution","kind":"process"},{"text":"Where several obligees exist, may any of them demand full performance and give a valid discharge?","id":"q-multiple-obligees","kind":"authority"}]}]},{"id":"alignment-and-exchange","name":"Standards Alignment and Exchange","description":"Mapping to external obligation vocabularies, with recorded conflicts and honest conformance claims.","findings":[{"id":"standard-alignment","name":"Crosswalk to external obligation vocabularies and recorded conflicts","description":"This model must exchange with ODRL Duty, LegalRuleML Obligation and PenaltyStatement, FIBO contractual commitment, IFRS 15 performance obligation and compliance-obligation registers, but the mappings are not clean. ODRL binds permissions and prohibitions to exactly one target Asset, which does not fit duties with no asset; ODRL forbids a consequence duty from carrying its own consequence, whereas escalation chains in law are open-ended; ODRL requires a processor to stop when it does not recognise a profile identifier; and the IFRS 15 sense of obligation is far narrower than the legal sense. Each divergence must be recorded as a conflict, not resolved silently, and conformance must never be claimed without evidence of validation.","questions":[{"text":"To which external term does each element map, and is the mapping exact, broader, narrower or merely related?","id":"q-term-mapping","kind":"interoperability"},{"text":"Which constraints of the target vocabulary does the mapping violate, such as required targets or consequence nesting limits?","id":"q-mapping-violations","kind":"constraint"},{"text":"Which conflict-resolution strategy applies when a permission and a prohibition on the same action collide?","id":"q-conflict-strategy","kind":"decision"},{"text":"What is asserted as formal conformance rather than mere alignment, and what validation evidence supports it?","id":"q-conformance-claim","kind":"evidence"},{"text":"Which profile identifiers must a consuming processor recognise, and what must it do when it does not?","id":"q-profile-identification","kind":"interoperability"}]},{"id":"external-obligation-sense-alignment","name":"Access, retention and interoperability mappings","description":"XACML obligations must be fulfilled by the PEP in conjunction with the authorization decision and are identified with attribute assignments. HL7 ObligationPolicy conveys mandated workflow such as encrypt, citing XACML and ISO 22600-2. FHIR Obligation codes express SHALL/SHOULD/MAY handling of content and must not be treated as legal duties. Obligation records contain party and commercial data, so default access is restricted to role-holders, evaluators and auditors. Retention after discharge is a Dimension policy; legal holds are exceptions. Interoperability is by alignment maps, not by claiming dual conformance.","questions":[{"text":"Who may read, create, update or delete this obligation record, at bundle, layer, finding and artefact scope, and which PEP obligations apply when access is decided?","id":"external-obligation-sense-alignment-q01","kind":"access"},{"text":"If this instance is an access-control obligation, what ObligationId and attribute assignments must the PEP fulfil with the decision, and what happens if it cannot?","id":"external-obligation-sense-alignment-q02","kind":"security"},{"text":"How long is the obligation record and its evidence retained after discharge, fulfilment or waiver, and is a legal hold or statutory retention in force?","id":"external-obligation-sense-alignment-q03","kind":"retention"},{"text":"Which external classes is this instance aligned to (ODRL Duty, LegalRuleML Obligation, FIBO Commitment, IAS 37 provision, IFRS 15 PO, XACML Obligation, FHIR Obligation), and which conflicts are declared rather than hidden?","id":"external-obligation-sense-alignment-q04","kind":"interoperability"},{"text":"Does the record contain personal data of parties such that privacy obligations (including HL7 anonymize/encrypt workflow) attach to storage and sharing?","id":"external-obligation-sense-alignment-q05","kind":"privacy"}]}]}]}]},"agentConduct":{"may":["Register an obligation with its source clause and bearer.","Evaluate whether triggering conditions are met and compute due dates.","Record fulfilment evidence and report the obligation register.","Alert bearers about approaching deadlines."],"mustNot":["Declare non-performance or apply a penalty on its own authority.","Interpret ambiguous legal text as settled without review.","Mark an obligation fulfilled without evidence.","Transfer an obligation without the consent the source requires.","Waive or extend a deadline."],"requiresHuman":["Declaring breach or applying remedies.","Approving transfer, waiver or variation of an obligation.","Resolving disputed interpretation."]},"ethics":{"considerations":["Obligations often protect weaker parties such as consumers or workers; tracking must not favour the stronger side.","Wrongly declared breaches can cause financial and reputational harm.","Obligations to the environment or the public need the same care as contractual ones."],"affectedParties":["Bearers of obligations","Beneficiaries and counterparties","Regulators and the public where duties are statutory"]},"owners":{"steward":"The adopting Dimension MUST designate one accountable owner package for WM-XCT-029 and record it in the Dimension registry before any obligation record is created; unowned obligation records MUST be rejected at creation.","roles":[{"name":"Obligation Model Owner","responsibilities":["Own the specification, vocabularies and version history of WM-XCT-029 within the adopting Dimension","Approve breaking changes, migrations and the declared list of host and sibling models","Maintain the registry entry and drive the outstanding boundary review to closure"]},{"name":"Obligation Registrar / Steward","responsibilities":["Create and maintain obligation records, assign identifiers under the identity priority and keep source citations accurate","Run currency reviews at the declared cadence and attest that register entries remain correct","Resolve duplicate and merge decisions against the declared match key"]},{"name":"Legal and Compliance Reviewer","responsibilities":["Review and approve modality, violability, governing law, jurisdiction, limitation and survival determinations","Approve breach declarations, excuse determinations and waiver or release decisions","Record conflicts between jurisdictions or between this model and external vocabularies rather than resolving them silently"]},{"name":"Performance Monitor","responsibilities":["Track due schedules, grace expiry and progress measurements and raise alerts within the declared lead times","Attach fulfilment evidence and record verification outcomes","Escalate impending or actual non-performance along the recorded escalation path"]},{"name":"Records and Retention Officer","responsibilities":["Apply retention triggers, legal holds and disposition to obligation records and their evidence","Issue destruction certificates and maintain tombstone integrity","Reconcile erasure requests against enforceability-window and legal-claim retention justifications"]},{"name":"Interoperability Custodian","responsibilities":["Maintain the alignment crosswalk with pinned target-vocabulary versions and recorded divergences","Run validators against exchange projections and retain dated validation reports","Block conformance claims that lack validation evidence"]}],"masterSystems":[]},"relations":[{"target":"Host record carrying duties (contract clause, statute or regulation article, licence condition, service commitment, internal policy statement, unilateral pledge)","type":"composes","note":"WM-XCT-029 is applied to any host record that creates or carries a duty, supplying the deontic core, conditions, due structure, lifecycle and fulfilment semantics without changing the host's own identity or content model."},{"target":"Agreement / Contract model","type":"references","note":"Resolve the instrument, its version and the clause locator that creates a contractual obligation; the instrument's formation, consideration and clause text stay in that model."},{"target":"Party / Legal Entity model","type":"references","note":"Resolve obligor, obligee, beneficiary, performing, enforcing and monitoring party references, including legal capacity, without duplicating party master data."},{"target":"Right / Entitlement model","type":"references","note":"Link the correlative right created by the commitment so that assignment of the right and transfer of the duty remain separately governed."},{"target":"Constraint / Condition expression model","type":"composes","note":"Compose the antecedent, refinement and rule constraints from a shared expression structure of left operand, operator, right operand, unit and logical combination."},{"target":"Obligation / Commitment (WM-XCT-029) as consequence, remedy or penalty obligation","type":"child","note":"Secondary obligations created by non-fulfilment or infringement are themselves obligations and recurse onto this model rather than being modelled as flat penalty attributes."},{"target":"Evidence / Document and credential model","type":"references","note":"Resolve fulfilment evidence, notices, certificates and their issuers, validity intervals, proofs and revocation status."},{"target":"Provenance model aligned to PROV-O","type":"aligned","note":"Align obligation-record provenance to Entity, Activity and Agent with generation, derivation, attribution, association and delegation, so that derived obligations remain traceable to their source clause."},{"target":"W3C ODRL 2.2 Duty and Constraint","type":"aligned","note":"Provide a machine-evaluable exchange projection for duties, actions, constraints, consequences and remedies, with recorded divergences on asset targeting and consequence nesting."},{"target":"OASIS LegalRuleML 1.0 Obligation, Violation and PenaltyStatement","type":"aligned","note":"Provide a legal-norm exchange projection carrying bearer, auxiliary party, violation, compliance, reparation, authority, jurisdiction and temporal characteristics."},{"target":"IFRS 15 performance obligation","type":"aligned","note":"Flag the narrower accounting subset of promises and their satisfaction pattern, without importing recognition or measurement into this model."},{"target":"Compliance obligations register (management system)","type":"extends","note":"Supply the per-entry structure that a compliance obligations register aggregates, covering both externally imposed requirements and voluntary commitments."},{"target":"Records retention and disposition model","type":"references","note":"Resolve retention triggers, periods, legal holds and destruction treatment for obligation records and their evidence."},{"target":"Agreement / Contract model","type":"neighbor","note":"An agreement is a negotiated understanding reflecting offer and acceptance of commitments; a commitment is a promise by one party to act or refrain. One agreement carries many obligations, and an obligation can exist with no agreement at all (statute, court order, unilateral commitment, commitment at large). This model references the instrument and never restates its terms."},{"target":"Policy / Rule container (ODRL Policy)","type":"neighbor","note":"ODRL places Duties inside a Policy, either as a policy-level obligation or as a pre-condition duty on a Permission. This mixin sits at the Rule/Duty level, not the container level; the policy grouping, conflict strategy and inheritance belong to the policy model."},{"target":"Right / Entitlement model","type":"neighbor","note":"A right is the reciprocal aspect of a commitment and is borne by a different party; LegalRuleML models a Right as a permission to a bearer that implies obligations on auxiliary parties. The correlative right is referenced, not duplicated, so that assignment of the right and transfer of the duty stay separable."},{"target":"Prohibition","type":"neighbor","note":"A prohibition is violated by performing the act, an obligation by failing to perform it. The modality and violation polarity are recorded here, but negative-duty enforcement semantics (remedy on infringement) differ from consequence semantics on unfulfilled duties and must not be collapsed."},{"target":"Task / Work item model","type":"neighbor","note":"A task is an execution artefact. Several tasks may contribute to discharging one obligation, and tasks exist with no obligation behind them. Progress measurement is carried here only as a discharge measure, not as work scheduling."},{"target":"Liability / Provision (accounting)","type":"neighbor","note":"IFRS 15 performance obligations are only promises to transfer distinct goods or services to a customer; obligations outside that definition fall to other standards. Recognition, measurement and presentation of the financial effect are out of scope and belong to a financial-reporting model."},{"target":"Constraint / Condition expression model","type":"neighbor","note":"ODRL defines Constraint as leftOperand/operator/rightOperand and LogicalConstraint as and/or/xone/andSequence. This model references those expression structures and their operand vocabularies rather than redefining operators."},{"target":"Compliance requirement register / control model","type":"neighbor","note":"A compliance management system maintains a register of obligations the organisation must or voluntarily chooses to meet. That register is a collection-level and programme-level concern; this model describes one obligation entry and does not carry control design or assurance results."},{"target":"Definitional (alethic) business rules","type":"neighbor","note":"SBVR separates alethic necessities, which cannot be violated even in principle, from deontic obligations, which may be violated although they ought not to be. Structural necessities must not be represented as obligations in this model."},{"target":"Provenance model","type":"neighbor","note":"PROV-O supplies the entity/activity/agent vocabulary for how the obligation record came to be. This model aligns to it and carries the minimum provenance fields inline; the full provenance graph belongs to the provenance model."}],"interaction":{"identity":{"applicability":"required","items":["Use the identifier assigned by the authoritative master system for the obligation where such a master exists, for example the obligation identifier issued by a contract-management or regulatory-register system of record.","Otherwise use a governed global identifier or IRI minted in the owner package's obligation namespace, resolvable and permanent.","Otherwise mint a UUID or ULID under the adopting Dimension's control and record the minting agent and instant.","A due date, a clause number, a party name or any combination of descriptive attributes is never an identifier; such combinations may serve only as declared match keys for deduplication.","Occurrence identity is always composite: the standing obligation identifier plus the occurrence key generated by the recorded recurrence rule version."]},"properties":{"applicability":"not-applicable","items":[]},"recognition":{"applicability":"optional","items":["An obligation names a bearer, a counterparty, an action, a modality, triggering conditions and a due schedule.","Often confused with a right, a task, a contract clause and a compliance control."]},"capabilities":{"applicability":"required","items":["Register obligation: Create an obligation record from a source instrument clause, statutory article, order or voluntary commitment, populating the deontic core and the source citation.","Classify obligation: Assign modality, violability, achievement or maintenance kind, effort standard, primary or secondary status and compliance category, with the criteria applied.","Evaluate antecedent and detach: Evaluate the obligation's antecedent and constraint set against observed operand values and, when satisfied, detach the obligation so that it becomes due.","Compute due schedule: Derive due instants and performance windows from the due basis, recurrence rule, time zone, business-day convention and any trigger events.","Evaluate fulfilment: Determine whether the obligation is fulfilled by testing constraint satisfaction and exercise of the refined action, accounting for quantity, acceptance and any consequence duties.","Record fulfilment evidence: Attach evidence of performance to an obligation or occurrence with its issuer, validity interval, integrity proof and status, and bind it to the quantity it discharges.","Declare non-performance: Determine and formally declare non-performance after the due time and grace period, classify it, assess materiality and serve any required notice.","Apply remedy or penalty: Create the consequence, remedy or penalty obligations triggered by non-fulfilment or infringement, compute amounts against the formula and cap, and link them to the breached obligation.","Transfer obligation or assign right: Record assignment of the correlative right, transfer of the duty, delegation of performance or novation, applying the identity continuity rule and any release of the original obligor.","Transition obligation state: Apply a permitted state transition, recording the prior and new state, the basis, the acting agent, the event time and the observation time.","Report obligation register: Produce a filtered, access-controlled view of obligations by owner, state, due window, jurisdiction or source, for monitoring, management review and assurance.","Apply retention and close: Evaluate the retention trigger, enforceability window and legal holds, then archive, tombstone or destroy the obligation record and its evidence, certifying the outcome.","Offer cure or grant additional period: Apply UNIDROIT 7.1.4 cure or 7.1.5 additional period, suspending inconsistent remedies until the period expires."]},"hazards":{"applicability":"required","items":["Missed deadlines cause penalties or loss of rights.","False fulfilment claims hide non-compliance.","Misread conditions trigger duties at the wrong time."]},"interfaces":{"applicability":"required","items":["W3C ODRL Information Model 2.2.","OASIS LegalRuleML.","ISO 37301 compliance management systems.","RFC 3339 timestamps.","W3C PROV-O."]},"context":{"applicability":"required","items":["The UNIDROIT Principles are soft law: they apply where the parties choose them, where they supplement an international instrument, or as gap-fillers. Their rules on best efforts, conditions, place and currency of performance, force majeure, hardship, assignment, limitation and plurality are used here as a well-attested reference frame, not as universally binding law.","Limitation periods, survival rules and the enforceability of penalty and liquidated-damages clauses vary materially by jurisdiction; several common-law systems restrict penalty clauses that civil-law systems permit. Specific durations and enforceability outcomes must be determined per governing law and are deliberately not asserted here.","GDPR-derived retention, erasure and lawful-basis structure applies to personal data within EU and EEA scope. Other regimes impose different retention floors and erasure rights, so the retention finding's mechanics are portable but its specific bases are not.","IFRS 15 applies where IFRS Accounting Standards are used; converged but non-identical national standards exist elsewhere, and jurisdictions on local GAAP may define performance obligations differently or not at all.","Business-day conventions, public holidays and civil-time offsets are jurisdiction-specific and are referenced from a calendar model rather than defined here; deadline computation is only as correct as that reference.","Notice service rules, including what counts as effective service and when it takes effect, are jurisdiction-specific; the model records service evidence and instants but does not assert validity of service.","UNIDROIT Principles are an international commercial-law restatement, not domestic mandatory law; local civil-code or common-law rules may add consideration, privity or formality requirements.","IAS 37/IFRS 15 overlays assume IFRS reporting; US GAAP and other GAAPs differ on constructive obligations and contingency thresholds.","LegalRuleML encodings are jurisdiction-neutral carriers of jurisdiction-specific norms; jurisdiction-code is an annotation, not a world-law identifier.","ODRL is a web policy language widely used for rights, not a substitute for private-law obligation in courts.","HL7/FHIR obligation codes reflect health-interoperability practice and must not be generalised as legal duties."]}},"sources":[{"title":"ODRL Information Model 2.2","url":"https://www.w3.org/TR/odrl-model/","note":"World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)"},{"title":"ODRL Vocabulary & Expression 2.2","url":"https://www.w3.org/TR/odrl-vocab/","note":"World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)"},{"title":"LegalRuleML Core Specification Version 1.0","url":"https://docs.oasis-open.org/legalruleml/legalruleml-core-spec/v1.0/legalruleml-core-spec-v1.0.html","note":"OASIS Open"},{"title":"FIBO Foundations — Agreements/Contracts ontology","url":"https://spec.edmcouncil.org/fibo/ontology/FND/Agreements/Contracts.rdf","note":"EDM Council (Financial Industry Business Ontology)"},{"title":"FIBO Foundations — Agreements ontology","url":"https://spec.edmcouncil.org/fibo/ontology/FND/Agreements/Agreements.rdf","note":"EDM Council (Financial Industry Business Ontology)"},{"title":"IFRS 15 Revenue from Contracts with Customers","url":"https://www.ifrs.org/issued-standards/list-of-standards/ifrs-15-revenue-from-contracts-with-customers/","note":"IFRS Foundation / International Accounting Standards Board"},{"title":"UNIDROIT Principles of International Commercial Contracts 2016","url":"https://www.unidroit.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/Unidroit-Principles-2016-English-bl.pdf","note":"International Institute for the Unification of Private Law (UNIDROIT)"},{"title":"RFC 3339: Date and Time on the Internet: Timestamps","url":"https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc3339","note":"Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)"},{"title":"PROV-O: The PROV Ontology","url":"https://www.w3.org/TR/prov-o/","note":"World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)"},{"title":"Regulation (EU) 2016/679 (General Data Protection Regulation)","url":"https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:32016R0679","note":"European Union (EUR-Lex)"},{"title":"ISO 37301:2021 Compliance management systems — Requirements with guidance for use","url":"https://committee.iso.org/sites/tc309/home/projects/published/iso-37301-compliance-management.html","note":"ISO/TC 309 Governance of organizations"},{"title":"Verifiable Credentials Data Model v2.0","url":"https://www.w3.org/TR/vc-data-model-2.0/","note":"World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)"},{"title":"Semantics of Business Vocabulary and Business Rules (SBVR)","url":"https://www.omg.org/spec/SBVR/","note":"Object Management Group (OMG)"},{"title":"Maintenance of Social Commitments in Multiagent Systems","url":"https://ojs.aaai.org/index.php/AAAI/article/view/17355","note":"Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence (AAAI) — Telang, Singh & Yorke-Smith"},{"title":"LegalRuleML Core Specification Version 1.0","url":"https://docs.oasis-open.org/legalruleml/legalruleml-core-spec/v1.0/os/legalruleml-core-spec-v1.0-os.html","note":"OASIS"},{"title":"FIBO Foundations Agreements Ontology","url":"https://raw.githubusercontent.com/edmcouncil/fibo/master/FND/Agreements/Agreements.rdf","note":"EDM Council / Object Management Group"},{"title":"UNIDROIT Principles of International Commercial Contracts — Chapter 7 Section 1 Non-Performance in General","url":"https://www.unidroit.org/instruments/commercial-contracts/unidroit-principles-2010/chapter-7-section-1/","note":"International Institute for the Unification of Private Law (UNIDROIT)"},{"title":"IAS 37 Provisions, Contingent Liabilities and Contingent Assets","url":"https://www.ifrs.org/issued-standards/list-of-standards/ias-37-provisions-contingent-liabilities-and-contingent-assets/","note":"IFRS Foundation / International Accounting Standards Board"},{"title":"eXtensible Access Control Markup Language (XACML) Version 3.0","url":"https://docs.oasis-open.org/xacml/3.0/xacml-3.0-core-spec-os-en.html","note":"OASIS"},{"title":"HL7 FHIR Obligation Codes and ObligationPolicy","url":"https://hl7.org/fhir/extensions/CodeSystem-obligation.html","note":"Health Level Seven International (HL7)"},{"title":"IFRS 15 Revenue from Contracts with Customers","url":"https://www.ifrs.org/content/dam/ifrs/publications/pdf-standards/english/2023/issued/part-a/ifrs-15-revenue-from-contracts-with-customers.pdf","note":"IFRS Foundation / International Accounting Standards Board"},{"title":"Data Product Ontology (DPROD) Duty profile","url":"https://ekgf.org/dprod/spec/develop","note":"Enterprise Knowledge Graph Forum (EKGF)"}],"openQuestions":["UNIDROIT 7.1.2: non-performance caused by the other party's act or by a risk it bears, and whether the base needs an explicit interference and risk-allocation defence distinct from the existing condition-interference question.","UNIDROIT 7.1.3 withholding of performance in reciprocal obligations (simultaneous versus consecutive tender) as a distinct pre-remedy state of an unperformed duty, currently absent from both the composition and the non-performance layers.","UNIDROIT 7.2.1 and 7.2.2 limits on specific performance (impossibility, unreasonable burden, reasonable cover from another source, exclusively personal character) and whether they belong to this mixin or to a remedies sibling model.","Whether the IAS 37 constructive obligation and the ISO 37301 voluntary commitment are the same origin axis; requires the normative clause text of both, neither of which was read by either provider.","Multiagent commitment operations (create, cancel, release, delegate, assign) over C(debtor, creditor, antecedent, consequent): the AAMAS commitment-alignment PDF failed to parse, so the finer-grained operations remain unasserted in the state model.","Insolvency effects on enforceability — automatic stay, set-off on insolvency, subordination and rescission of preferences — listed as a base known omission and material to the limitation and survival findings.","DPROD Duty profile status and whether any Dimension declares it, before its Pending/Active/Fulfilled/Violated vocabulary could ever be referenced as more than a third-party profile.","ISO/IEC 19086-1 (cloud SLA framework, service level objectives and service qualitative objectives) could not be retrieved; the standard's page returned HTTP 403. The performance-standard finding therefore lacks the primary grounding that would normally define threshold, metric and measurement-window structure.","The normative text of ISO 37301:2021 is paywalled; only the ISO/TC 309 committee scope statement was read. Obligations-register requirements are therefore treated as gap-level support.","Multiagent commitment-protocol literature that formalises the operations create, cancel, release, delegate and assign over C(debtor, creditor, antecedent, consequent) could not be machine-read (the AAMAS commitment-alignment PDF failed to parse). The state model is grounded in ODRL, LegalRuleML and UNIDROIT, with the achievement-versus-maintenance distinction taken from the AAAI 2021 abstract only; the finer-grained commitment operations are deliberately not asserted.","The OMG SBVR specification page yielded title, version and date but not the clause text on deontic and alethic modality; the distinction as used here is supported at the level of SBVR's stated purpose plus secondary commentary, so the violability filter is a weaker claim than the ODRL and LegalRuleML groundings.","Insolvency effects on obligations — automatic stay, set-off on insolvency, subordination and rescission of preferences — are not modelled and would materially change enforceability.","Tax, prudential and sector-specific statutory obligation catalogues are not enumerated; only GDPR is used as a worked statutory example.","Non-Western and non-commercial obligation frameworks (Shariah-compliant structures, customary and community obligations, family-law duties) are not addressed; the model's grounding is commercial and regulatory.","Distributed-ledger or self-executing settlement semantics are treated as an interface projection and are not modelled; automated execution introduces determinism and finality questions this model does not answer.","Negotiation and pre-contractual commitments (letters of intent, memoranda of understanding, comfort letters) are not distinguished from binding commitments beyond the violability filter.","Aggregate and portfolio-level views — exposure across obligations, netting, and covenant baskets — are out of scope; this model describes one obligation at a time.","FIBO FND Law LegalCapacity contingent-obligation and condition-precedent properties were only snippet-searched, not fetched as a full ontology, so clause-linkage details are a gap.","Assignment, delegation and novation of obligations are not specified in the fetched UNIDROIT chapter 7 section 1; likely belong to a sibling transfer/novation model.","Joint and several liability multiplicity is asked but not grounded in a primary multiplicity scheme beyond FIBO party-role cardinality.","Prescription, limitation periods and death/incapacity of the obligor lack primary support in the fetched set.","CISG Article 33 (time of performance) is the acknowledged inspiration for UNIDROIT 6.1.1 but was not fetched.","ISO 37301 compliance-management obligations and ISO 22600-2 (cited by HL7) were not fetched as primary texts.","Smart-contract oracle fulfilment, Islamic finance consideration rules, and criminal-law duties are out of the fetched corpus.","DPROD dutyState is an emerging profile, not W3C ODRL core; using it as canonical state without a Dimension declaration would be over-claim.","Hohfeld correlatives are treated only via LegalRuleML Right and FIBO reciprocity, not via a jurisprudence primary text."],"resources":{"spec":"/models/wm-xct-029-obligation-commitment/spec.yaml","agents":"/models/wm-xct-029-obligation-commitment/AGENTS.md","source":"https://github.com/ver-cy/world-models/tree/feat/mega-model-registry/research/runs/wm-xct-029"},"provenance":{"origin":"world-models research","builtFrom":["models/wm-xct-029-obligation-commitment/spec.yaml","ver-cy/world-models/card-supplements/wm-xct-029-obligation-commitment.json"],"providers":["Claude","Grok"],"researchStatus":"reviewable-draft","generatedAt":"2026-08-23T19:21:40Z","builder":"tools/build_cards.py@1.0.0"},"completeness":{"sections":{"classifiers":"filled","whatItIs":"filled","purpose":"filled","distinguishingFeatures":"filled","structure":"filled","agentConduct":"filled","ethics":"filled","owners":"filled","relations":"filled","interaction.identity":"filled","interaction.properties":"not-applicable","interaction.recognition":"filled","interaction.capabilities":"filled","interaction.hazards":"filled","interaction.interfaces":"filled","interaction.context":"filled","sources":"filled"},"notes":{"interaction.properties":"Institutional or informational subject: no invented physical properties.","_supplement":"Sections authored in card supplement 1.0.0 by Claude (Opus 5.5) (2026-10-05, unreviewed). Written from the published specification and established practice in the field; no new sources were read. Unreviewed."},"score":1.0}}