{ "model": { "rank": 6055, "code": "thing-q192521", "model_id": "vr.tr.technical-drawing", "name": "technical drawing", "purpose": "Enable an AI agent to recognise a technical drawing, assess whether its representations and instructions are fit for an intended use, and determine which interpretations or actions its evidence and release state support.", "family": "Thing Registry", "category": "Activities and processes", "status": "research-draft", "kind": "thing", "plane": "ACT", "domain": "ACT.ACT", "industry": "", "version": "", "url": "/models/thing/q192521/", "tier": 2, "score": 63, "payload": { "layer": "wikidata", "aliases": [ "mechanical drawing", "patternmaking", "Plumbing drawing" ], "aliasCount": 3, "merged": 3, "knownIn": 63, "facets": null, "markers": [], "lexicalClass": "", "senseRank": null, "alsoRegisteredAs": null, "source": { "dataset": "wikidata", "item": "Q192521", "url": "https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q192521", "license": "CC0 1.0" } }, "research": { "vercy": "1.0-draft", "publication": { "status": "research-draft", "adjudicationStatus": "unreviewed", "publishableCanonical": false, "generatedAt": "2026-09-07T11:17:44Z", "providers": [ "Codex", "Grok" ], "missingProviders": [], "pass": 2, "cost": { "grok": { "usd": 0.00869652, "turns": 1, "seconds": 131.9, "error": null }, "codex": { "seconds": 73.4, "error": "Reading additional input from stdin...\nOpenAI Codex v0.153.3\n--------\nworkdir: R:\\02_PROJECTS\\02_Meta_Models_Platforms\\Ver.cy\\current\\thing-registry-backlog\nmodel: gpt-6-astra\nprovider: openai\napproval: never\nsandbox: read-only\nreasoning effort: none\nreasoning summaries: none\nsession id: 01a07b92-5a42-7320-8557-eef481a80cf4\n--------\nuser\nYou are drafting a Vercy meta-model for one registered thing. Answer as JSON only, no prose around it.\n\nThing: technical drawing\nRegistry id: vr.tr.technical-drawing\nPlane / domain: ACT / ACT.ACT\nRegistry definition: (none recorded)\nNames folded into this entr" } } }, "metaModel": { "id": "THING-Q192521", "registryId": "vr.tr.technical-drawing", "name": "technical drawing", "version": "0.1.0-research.1", "entryKind": "thing", "family": "Thing Registry", "domain": [ "ACT.ACT" ], "status": "research-draft" }, "canonicalUrl": "https://ver.cy/models/thing/q192521/", "model": { "registry_id": "vr.tr.technical-drawing", "name": "technical drawing", "purpose": "Enable an AI agent to recognise a technical drawing, assess whether its representations and instructions are fit for an intended use, and determine which interpretations or actions its evidence and release state support.", "definition": "A technical drawing is a controlled graphic document that represents an object, assembly, or built work in a standardized projection and notation so that geometry, dimensions, tolerances, materials, and process information can be read, manufactured, inspected, or constructed without the drafter present.", "scope_statement": "This model owns the technical drawing as a controlled graphical specification or record: what it depicts, how its views and annotations communicate technical intent, what requirements it expresses, and when a particular revision may be relied upon.", "in_scope": [ "The drawing's subject, intended technical use and boundary of authority", "Sheets, views, projections, sections, details and their correspondence", "Dimensions, tolerances, symbols, notes and explicitly referenced requirements", "Drawing-specific completeness, consistency, legibility and unresolved ambiguity", "Revision, approval, release and applicability to particular configurations" ], "out_of_scope": [ "The depicted component, assembly, structure or installation as a physical thing", "The underlying CAD model's geometry, feature history and simulation behaviour", "Manufacturing operations, construction activities and their execution records", "Inspection events, measured results and conformity decisions", "Project schedules, procurement agreements and organisational approval policies" ], "distinguishing_features": [ "It communicates technical intent through identifiable graphical representations and annotations that support an engineering, fabrication, construction, installation or inspection task.", "Unlike a pictorial illustration, it provides or explicitly references conventions and requirements for interpreting geometry or technical relationships.", "Unlike a freehand concept sketch, a drawing usable as a specification makes its necessary dimensions, constraints or authoritative references identifiable; visual polish alone does not establish that status.", "Unlike a CAD model alone, it presents selected views and drawing annotations whose meaning and authority can be assessed independently of the model's feature history.", "Unlike a process schematic, its interpretation ordinarily depends on depicted physical geometry or spatial arrangement; hybrid documents require an explicit boundary between geometric and symbolic content." ], "characteristics": [ { "name": "Drawing role", "kind": "category", "unit_or_values": "Examples: concept, detail, assembly, layout, installation, record; local classifications may differ", "why_it_matters": "Determines which information must be present before the drawing can support its intended task." }, { "name": "Depicted subject and configuration", "kind": "relation", "unit_or_values": "Links to identified parts, assemblies, structures or installations and applicable variants", "why_it_matters": "Prevents a technically valid drawing from being applied to the wrong subject." }, { "name": "View scale", "kind": "measurement", "unit_or_values": "Declared drawing-to-subject ratio per view, or explicitly not to scale", "why_it_matters": "Supports spatial interpretation while exposing cases where image measurement is unreliable or unauthorised." }, { "name": "Projection and representation convention", "kind": "category", "unit_or_values": "Declared projection method and view conventions, including unknown or mixed", "why_it_matters": "Controls how an agent reconstructs spatial relationships between views." }, { "name": "Dimensional unit system", "kind": "category", "unit_or_values": "Declared units and scope of application, including mixed units or unspecified", "why_it_matters": "Prevents numerical requirements from being interpreted at the wrong magnitude." }, { "name": "Requirement references", "kind": "relation", "unit_or_values": "Linked specifications, standards, notes and model references with identifiable versions", "why_it_matters": "Makes externally defined meanings and acceptance requirements traceable." }, { "name": "Technical readiness", "kind": "state", "unit_or_values": "Unassessed, incomplete, ambiguous, inconsistent or assessed as sufficient for a named use", "why_it_matters": "Separates the presence of a drawing from evidence that an agent can safely act on it." }, { "name": "Revision and release state", "kind": "state", "unit_or_values": "Recorded revision identifier and local lifecycle status, with approval evidence where available", "why_it_matters": "Determines whether this exact issue is authorised for the proposed action." }, { "name": "Authority relationship", "kind": "relation", "unit_or_values": "Declared precedence among drawing, CAD model, specifications and related documents", "why_it_matters": "Identifies how conflicting representations must be resolved." } ], "affordances": [ "Identify the drawing's subject, revision and applicable configuration before using its content.", "Trace a depicted feature across views, sections, details and associated annotations.", "Extract explicit technical requirements while preserving units, qualifiers and source locations.", "Check for missing references, contradictory dimensions, unreadable annotations and unresolved interpretation choices.", "Compare drawing revisions and identify affected features, requirements and downstream uses.", "Recommend proceeding, restricting use or requesting clarification based on technical sufficiency and release evidence." ] }, "sources": [ { "id": "iso-128-1", "title": "ISO 128-1: Technical product documentation (TPD) - General principles of representation - Part 1: Introduction and basic requirements", "url": "", "what_it_supports": "Definition of technical product documentation as a standardized graphic language; line types, views, and general presentation rules used in technical drawings." }, { "id": "iso-10209", "title": "ISO 10209: Technical product documentation - Vocabulary - Terms relating to technical drawings, product definition and related documentation", "url": "", "what_it_supports": "Controlled vocabulary distinguishing technical drawing from related documentation types and naming projection, dimensioning, and document kinds." }, { "id": "asme-y14-5", "title": "ASME Y14.5: Dimensioning and Tolerancing (American Society of Mechanical Engineers)", "url": "", "what_it_supports": "US engineering-drawing practice for dimensions, tolerances, and geometric dimensioning and tolerancing as they appear on technical drawings." }, { "id": "asme-y14-100", "title": "ASME Y14.100: Engineering Drawing Practices (American Society of Mechanical Engineers)", "url": "", "what_it_supports": "US engineering drawing practices covering drawing types, revision control, and associated documentation conventions." }, { "id": "iso-5456", "title": "ISO 5456: Technical drawings - Projection methods (International Organization for Standardization)", "url": "", "what_it_supports": "First-angle and third-angle orthographic projection and related pictorial methods, which is the main regional split in reading drawings." }, { "id": "wikipedia-technical-drawing", "title": "Technical drawing (Wikipedia, Wikimedia Foundation)", "url": "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technical_drawing", "what_it_supports": "Overview of drawing kinds, projection methods, sheet sizes, and the distinction from sketches, illustrations, and diagrams.", "url_status": "live" } ], "structure": { "bundles": [ { "id": "drawing-purpose-and-authority", "name": "Drawing purpose and authority", "description": "Establishes what the drawing represents and which technical decisions it may govern.", "rationale": "A drawing can be intelligible yet inappropriate for a particular part, configuration or action.", "layers": [ { "id": "subject-and-intended-use", "name": "Subject and intended use", "description": "Connects the drawing to the depicted subject and the task it is meant to support.", "findings": [ { "id": "subject-use-and-extent", "name": "Subject, use and extent", "description": "Record the identified subject, intended drawing role and limits of the depicted scope.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which part, assembly, structure or installation does this drawing identify, and what technical task is it intended to support?", "kind": "definition", "id": "subject-use-and-extent-q01" }, { "text": "Which variants, interfaces or portions of the subject are excluded or shown only for context?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "subject-use-and-extent-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "controlling-representations", "name": "Controlling representations", "description": "Determines how this drawing relates to other sources of technical intent.", "findings": [ { "id": "authority-and-precedence", "name": "Authority and precedence", "description": "Record evidence for whether drawing annotations, model geometry or external specifications govern particular requirements.", "questions": [ { "text": "What recorded instruction establishes the drawing's authority relative to its CAD model and referenced specifications?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "authority-and-precedence-q01" }, { "text": "If a drawing value conflicts with another representation, what resolution process is authorised?", "kind": "action", "id": "authority-and-precedence-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "views-and-spatial-interpretation", "name": "Views and spatial interpretation", "description": "Captures how the drawing's graphical representations describe physical geometry and arrangement.", "rationale": "An agent must interpret selected two-dimensional representations without mistaking projection, omission or simplification for physical geometry.", "layers": [ { "id": "view-system", "name": "View system", "description": "Identifies views and the conventions that relate them spatially.", "findings": [ { "id": "projection-orientation-and-scale", "name": "Projection, orientation and scale", "description": "Record the evidence needed to interpret orientation, correspondence and scale for each relevant view.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which projection and orientation conventions are declared, and how are corresponding features located across views?", "kind": "definition", "id": "projection-orientation-and-scale-q01" }, { "text": "What scale applies to each view, and is the available reproduction known to preserve it?", "kind": "measurement", "id": "projection-orientation-and-scale-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "sections-details-and-omissions", "name": "Sections, details and omissions", "description": "Tracks local representations that reveal, enlarge, simplify or omit geometry.", "findings": [ { "id": "local-view-correspondence", "name": "Local view correspondence", "description": "Connect each section, detail and broken or simplified view to its parent geometry and interpretation limits.", "questions": [ { "text": "Where do section cuts and detail callouts originate, and which features do their resulting views expose?", "kind": "definition", "id": "local-view-correspondence-q01" }, { "text": "Which geometry is omitted, shortened or simplified, and what information must not be inferred from that representation?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "local-view-correspondence-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "dimensions-and-technical-requirements", "name": "Dimensions and technical requirements", "description": "Captures the explicit constraints that turn depicted geometry into actionable technical intent.", "rationale": "A shape's appearance does not establish its required size, permissible variation, material or treatment.", "layers": [ { "id": "dimensional-and-geometric-control", "name": "Dimensional and geometric control", "description": "Interprets numerical and geometric requirements together with their units, references and qualifiers.", "findings": [ { "id": "feature-requirements-and-variation", "name": "Feature requirements and variation", "description": "Associate dimensions and tolerance indications with the features they control and the references needed to interpret them.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which feature does each relevant dimension control, in what units, and with what stated limits or tolerance?", "kind": "measurement", "id": "feature-requirements-and-variation-q01" }, { "text": "Which datums, general tolerance notes or referenced conventions are needed to interpret the requirement?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "feature-requirements-and-variation-q02" }, { "text": "Which displayed dimensions are explicitly informational rather than controlling?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "feature-requirements-and-variation-q03" } ] } ] }, { "id": "symbols-notes-and-specifications", "name": "Symbols, notes and specifications", "description": "Interprets requirements conveyed through callouts and text rather than view geometry alone.", "findings": [ { "id": "non-geometric-and-local-instructions", "name": "Non-geometric and local instructions", "description": "Record material, finish, joining and other instructions where present, including their applicability and referenced meanings.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which notes or symbols specify material, surface condition, joining, treatment or other technical requirements, and where does each apply?", "kind": "definition", "id": "non-geometric-and-local-instructions-q01" }, { "text": "Which source and version define each non-obvious symbol or referenced specification, and is that source available?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "non-geometric-and-local-instructions-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "drawing-sufficiency-and-interpretability", "name": "Drawing sufficiency and interpretability", "description": "Assesses whether the available drawing can support a named technical task without unsupported assumptions.", "rationale": "An apparently complete sheet may still omit essential views, contain conflicting instructions or lose critical information during reproduction.", "layers": [ { "id": "coverage-and-consistency", "name": "Coverage and consistency", "description": "Checks whether the drawing package provides coherent information for the intended action.", "findings": [ { "id": "task-critical-gaps-and-conflicts", "name": "Task-critical gaps and conflicts", "description": "Identify missing or incompatible information and connect each issue to the technical decision it blocks.", "questions": [ { "text": "For the proposed task, which necessary features or interfaces lack sufficient views, dimensions or referenced requirements?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "task-critical-gaps-and-conflicts-q01" }, { "text": "Do views, dimension chains, notes or referenced documents give incompatible instructions, and which decisions depend on resolving them?", "kind": "action", "id": "task-critical-gaps-and-conflicts-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "reproduction-and-reading-confidence", "name": "Reproduction and reading confidence", "description": "Assesses information loss and uncertainty in the particular file, scan or print being interpreted.", "findings": [ { "id": "legibility-and-extraction-evidence", "name": "Legibility and extraction evidence", "description": "Distinguish directly readable requirements from uncertain recognition or reconstruction.", "questions": [ { "text": "Are any sheets, margins, symbols, decimal marks, line types or annotations missing, clipped or unreadable in this copy?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "legibility-and-extraction-evidence-q01" }, { "text": "Which extracted requirements need verification against a clearer or authoritative copy before an agent can use them?", "kind": "action", "id": "legibility-and-extraction-evidence-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "revision-release-and-applicability", "name": "Revision, release and applicability", "description": "Establishes which issue of the drawing applies and what use its recorded status permits.", "rationale": "Correct technical interpretation is insufficient when the drawing is superseded, unapproved or intended for a different configuration.", "layers": [ { "id": "issue-and-sheet-integrity", "name": "Issue and sheet integrity", "description": "Identifies the drawing issue and checks the integrity of its sheet set.", "findings": [ { "id": "revision-and-change-trace", "name": "Revision and change trace", "description": "Record drawing and sheet identifiers, revision evidence and changes that affect technical requirements.", "questions": [ { "text": "What drawing number, revision and sheet identifiers establish this issue, and is the required sheet set present?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "revision-and-change-trace-q01" }, { "text": "Which features or requirements changed from the relevant prior issue, according to revision records and content comparison?", "kind": "definition", "id": "revision-and-change-trace-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "release-and-permitted-use", "name": "Release and permitted use", "description": "Relates release evidence to configurations and proposed downstream actions.", "findings": [ { "id": "authorised-use-and-effectivity", "name": "Authorised use and effectivity", "description": "Record the evidence supporting use of this issue for a specific configuration and activity.", "questions": [ { "text": "What approval or release record authorises this issue, and to which configurations, serial ranges, locations or dates does it apply?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "authorised-use-and-effectivity-q01" }, { "text": "Does the recorded status permit the proposed fabrication, construction, installation or inspection use, or require clarification first?", "kind": "action", "id": "authorised-use-and-effectivity-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "evidence-and-external-alignment", "name": "Evidence and external alignment", "description": "What the world already says about this thing, gathered so the model can be checked against it.", "rationale": "A model that cannot be lined up against existing standards, identifiers and practice cannot be adopted by anyone who already uses them.", "layers": [ { "id": "reported-evidence", "name": "Reported evidence", "description": "Findings from the breadth pass, kept separate from the structural claims.", "findings": [ { "id": "evidence-kinds", "name": "Kinds and varieties", "description": "Reported by the breadth pass; each item needs checking against its source before it becomes normative.", "evidence": [ "Orthographic multi-view drawings", "Pictorial drawings (isometric, axonometric, oblique)", "Detail (part) drawings", "Assembly drawings", "General arrangement drawings", "Shop and fabrication drawings", "Construction and working drawings", "Schematic and diagrammatic drawings" ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-kinds-q01", "text": "Which of these kinds and varieties hold for the sense of technical drawing this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] }, { "id": "evidence-identifiers", "name": "Identifiers and schemes", "description": "Reported by the breadth pass; each item needs checking against its source before it becomes normative.", "evidence": [ { "scheme": "Wikidata", "value_or_pattern": "Q192525", "note": "Item for technical drawing as a graphic document and practice." }, { "scheme": "ISO ICS", "value_or_pattern": "01.100", "note": "International Classification for Standards field 'Technical drawings'; 01.100.01 is technical drawings in general." }, { "scheme": "ISO 10209 term", "value_or_pattern": "technical drawing", "note": "Defined term in the ISO technical product documentation vocabulary, not a registry code." } ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-identifiers-q01", "text": "Which of these identifiers and schemes hold for the sense of technical drawing this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] }, { "id": "evidence-standards-and-regulation", "name": "Standards and regulation", "description": "Reported by the breadth pass; each item needs checking against its source before it becomes normative.", "evidence": [ "ISO 128 series - general principles of representation (International Organization for Standardization)", "ISO 129 series - indication of dimensions and tolerances (ISO)", "ISO 5456 - projection methods (ISO)", "ISO 5457 - sizes and layout of drawing sheets (ISO)", "ISO 7200 - data fields in title blocks and document headers (ISO)", "ISO 1101 - geometrical product specifications, geometrical tolerancing (ISO)", "ASME Y14.5 - dimensioning and tolerancing (American Society of Mechanical Engineers)", "ASME Y14.100 - engineering drawing practices (ASME)", "BS 8888 - technical product documentation and specification (British Standards Institution)", "Building and planning law in many jurisdictions requires submitted construction drawings as part of permit and contract documents (national and local building authorities)" ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-standards-and-regulation-q01", "text": "Which of these standards and regulation hold for the sense of technical drawing this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] }, { "id": "evidence-real-world-use", "name": "Real-world use", "description": "Reported by the breadth pass; each item needs checking against its source before it becomes normative.", "evidence": [ "Issued as the manufacturing authority for machined and fabricated parts: shops cut, inspect, and accept work against the drawing (or against a drawing derived from a CAD model).", "Bound into construction contract sets that architects, engineers, and contractors use to price, build, and inspect buildings and civil works.", "Filed with patent offices as formal disclosure drawings of an invention.", "Kept as as-built records for plant, ship, and facility operations and maintenance.", "Used on the shop floor as printed sheets or viewers next to machines, often with a revision stamp that is the only accepted issue.", "Taught as engineering graphics: orthographic projection, sectioning, and dimensioning as the language of manufacture and construction." ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-real-world-use-q01", "text": "Which of these real-world use hold for the sense of technical drawing this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] }, { "id": "evidence-measurements", "name": "Typical measurements", "description": "Reported by the breadth pass; each item needs checking against its source before it becomes normative.", "evidence": [ { "quantity": "Sheet size", "typical_range": "ISO A4 to A0 (210 × 297 mm to 841 × 1189 mm); ANSI A to E in US practice", "unit": "mm" }, { "quantity": "Drawing scale", "typical_range": "Mechanical commonly 2:1, 1:1, 1:2, 1:5; architectural/civil commonly 1:50, 1:100, 1:200, 1:500", "unit": "dimensionless ratio" }, { "quantity": "Line width", "typical_range": "0.13-2.0 (preferred steps 0.25, 0.35, 0.5, 0.7, 1.0)", "unit": "mm" }, { "quantity": "Linear dimension", "typical_range": "ISO practice in millimetres; US customary practice often in inches, sometimes dual-dimensioned", "unit": "mm or in" }, { "quantity": "Geometric tolerance", "typical_range": "from about 0.001 on precision parts to several millimetres on fabricated structure, as specified", "unit": "mm or in" }, { "quantity": "Revision index", "typical_range": "letter or number sequence on the title block (A, B, C… or 01, 02…)", "unit": "dimensionless" } ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-measurements-q01", "text": "Which of these typical measurements hold for the sense of technical drawing this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] }, { "id": "evidence-failure-modes-and-hazards", "name": "Failure modes and hazards", "description": "Reported by the breadth pass; each item needs checking against its source before it becomes normative.", "evidence": [ "Missing, conflicting, or undimensioned features so a part cannot be made or inspected as intended.", "First-angle versus third-angle projection misread, reversing handedness of the part.", "Millimetre/inch or scale errors producing parts or buildings of the wrong size.", "Shop using a superseded revision while a later issue is the contractual authority.", "Drawing not matching the 3D CAD model (model-drawing inconsistency), so manufacture follows the wrong definition.", "Inadequate geometric tolerancing causing fit, function, or interchangeability failure at assembly.", "Poor reproduction or over-reduced plots making line types, hidden lines, and notes unreadable.", "Contract and liability disputes over what a drawing required when notes, views, or specifications conflict." ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-failure-modes-and-hazards-q01", "text": "Which of these failure modes and hazards hold for the sense of technical drawing this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] }, { "id": "evidence-regional-variation", "name": "Regional variation", "description": "Reported by the breadth pass; each item needs checking against its source before it becomes normative.", "evidence": [ "Europe and most ISO users place the third-angle/first-angle symbol for first-angle projection; the United States, Canada, and Japan commonly use third-angle projection.", "ISO practice dimensions in millimetres on A-series sheets; US practice often uses inches and ANSI/ASME sheet sizes.", "Decimal comma is normal in much of continental Europe; decimal point in US, UK, and many other English-language drawings.", "National overlay standards (ASME Y14 in the US, BS 8888 in the UK, JIS B 0001 in Japan, DIN/ISO in Germany) change title blocks, folding, thread depiction, and tolerancing defaults even when ISO 128 is the graphic base.", "Names differ: 'engineering drawing' and 'blueprint' are common in North American shops; 'dessin technique', 'Technische Zeichnung', and 'dibujo técnico' are the usual terms in French, German, and Spanish practice." ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-regional-variation-q01", "text": "Which of these regional variation hold for the sense of technical drawing this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] }, { "id": "evidence-neighbours", "name": "Neighbouring kinds and how to tell them apart", "description": "Reported by the breadth pass; each item needs checking against its source before it becomes normative.", "evidence": [ { "name": "Freehand sketch", "difference": "A sketch is informal and not produced to a drawing standard; a technical drawing uses controlled projection, line types, and (usually) dimensions that can be inspected." }, { "name": "Technical illustration or rendering", "difference": "An illustration communicates appearance or assembly sequence; a technical drawing specifies geometry and manufacturing or construction intent." }, { "name": "Schematic diagram (when used as a neighbour to scaled drawings)", "difference": "A schematic preserves connectivity or topology and is not a scale map of shape; a detail or arrangement drawing is geometrically scaled (or explicitly not-to-scale with true dimensions)." }, { "name": "3D CAD model / model-based definition", "difference": "The model is the digital product definition in 3D; a technical drawing is a projected 2D document derived from or standing in for that definition." }, { "name": "Map or cartographic plan", "difference": "A map represents geographic territory with cartographic conventions; a technical drawing represents a designed object or works with engineering projection and dimensioning." }, { "name": "Blueprint", "difference": "Blueprint names a historical reproduction process (and, loosely, a copy); the technical drawing is the original graphic document being reproduced." }, { "name": "Photograph", "difference": "A photograph records an existing appearance; a technical drawing specifies what is to be made or how an existing thing is dimensioned for work." } ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-neighbours-q01", "text": "Which of these neighbouring kinds and how to tell them apart hold for the sense of technical drawing this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] } ] } ] } ] }, "openQuestions": [ "Does the registry intend technical drawing to include engineering sketches, schematics and hybrid diagram-drawing documents, or should those link to neighbouring models?", "Which discipline-specific drawing conventions and standards must be researched before projection, symbols and tolerance semantics can be interpreted reliably?", "How should authority be represented where a drawing and a model-based definition divide control over different requirements?", "What evidence establishes sufficiency for each intended use, especially when essential requirements are supplied by external specifications?", "How do the relevant organisations express sheet-level revisions, release states, effectivity and the evidential limits of record or as-built drawings?" ], "statistics": { "bundles": 6, "layers": 11, "findings": 18, "questions": 29 } }, "draft": { "generator": "vr.draft.v3", "status": "draft-generated", "researched": false, "archetype": "abstract concept", "method": "Written from the archetype playbook - what this kind of thing needs beyond identity and provenance - and from the structure that recurred across 6,333 models already researched by two engines. Applied to this entry by rule. No source was read for this thing and no claim here is researched. This entry carries no facets of its own, so they were inferred from its domain - a guess about a whole domain applied to one thing.", "facetsInferred": true, "nextPass": "A researcher replaces this draft with a sourced specification. Treat every sentence below as a proposal to argue with.", "purpose": "Give an agent a durable, checkable way to recognise a technical drawing, record what state it is in, and decide what may be done with it.", "whatItIs": "Enable an AI agent to recognise a technical drawing, assess whether its representations and instructions are fit for an intended use, and determine which interpretations or actions its evidence and release state support.", "characteristics": { "substance": "activity", "origin": "conceptual", "agency": "inert" }, "whatYouCanDoWithIt": [ "observed and measured" ], "distinguishingFeatures": [ "Names folded into this entry, which a task may need to split apart again: mechanical drawing, patternmaking, Plumbing drawing.", "3 finer distinctions are held as aliases rather than separate entries, because telling them apart needs a task that asks for it.", "Described in 63 Wikipedia languages, which is a measure of how widely the thing is known, not of how important it is." ], "openQuestionsForResearch": [ "Which of the bundles below does a real task actually need, and which are ceremony?", "What does this thing have that the facets do not capture at all?", "Which neighbouring kind is most often confused with a technical drawing, and on what evidence are they told apart?" ], "whatItIsMadeOf": "something that happens over time", "physicalCharacter": [ "Does nothing on its own; everything it does, something else did to it.", "These come from the domain this entry sits in rather than from the entry itself, so treat them as a first guess about the whole domain applied to one thing." ], "whatCanBeDoneWithIt": [ "observe it, measure it, record its state" ], "howItIsRecognised": [ "Nothing to see. What is recognised is an instance of it, and which instances count is exactly what is argued about." ], "relatedModels": [ { "relation": "covers", "note": "Finer kinds folded into this entry because telling them apart needs a task that asks for it. Each is a model waiting to be split out when one does.", "targets": [ "mechanical drawing", "patternmaking", "Plumbing drawing" ] } ], "standing": "Described in 63 Wikipedia languages, which measures how widely it is written about rather than how important or how common it is. 3 finer distinctions are held inside this entry as names rather than as separate models.", "structure": { "bundles": [ { "id": "identity-and-classification", "name": "Identity, naming and classification", "description": "How an agent tells one technical drawing from another, and a technical drawing from things that resemble it.", "rationale": "Recognition comes before every other claim. Without stable identity nothing else in the model can be trusted to be about the same thing twice.", "layers": [ { "id": "naming-and-identifiers", "name": "Names and identifiers", "description": "The names this thing goes by and the identifiers that survive translation and time.", "findings": [ { "id": "preferred-name-and-aliases", "name": "Preferred name, aliases and local names", "description": "Which name to use, which names mean the same thing, and which merely sound similar.", "questions": [ { "id": "preferred-name-and-aliases-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes the name of a technical drawing, and in what units or vocabulary?", "kind": "definition", "answer_data": [ "identifiers", "types and classes", "values with units", "explicit unknowns" ] }, { "id": "preferred-name-and-aliases-q02", "text": "Who or what asserted this about the name of a technical drawing, by which method, and when was it true?", "kind": "provenance", "answer_data": [ "authority", "method", "evidence", "event time", "knowledge time" ] }, { "id": "preferred-name-and-aliases-q03", "text": "What may an agent decide or do once the name of a technical drawing is known, and what must it refuse?", "kind": "action", "answer_data": [ "permitted actions", "preconditions", "refusals", "escalation" ] } ] }, { "id": "stable-identifiers", "name": "Stable identifiers and external keys", "description": "Identifiers that keep pointing at this kind of thing across systems and languages.", "questions": [ { "id": "stable-identifiers-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes an identifier for a technical drawing, and in what units or vocabulary?", "kind": "definition", "answer_data": [ "identifiers", "types and classes", "values with units", "explicit unknowns" ] }, { "id": "stable-identifiers-q02", "text": "Who or what asserted this about an identifier for a technical drawing, by which method, and when was it true?", "kind": "provenance", "answer_data": [ "authority", "method", "evidence", "event time", "knowledge time" ] }, { "id": "stable-identifiers-q03", "text": "What may an agent decide or do once an identifier for a technical drawing is known, and what must it refuse?", "kind": "action", "answer_data": [ "permitted actions", "preconditions", "refusals", "escalation" ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "classification-and-granularity", "name": "Classification and granularity", "description": "Where a technical drawing sits among kinds, and how finely a task needs to cut it.", "findings": [ { "id": "kind-and-parents", "name": "Kind, parents and neighbouring kinds", "description": "The classes this thing belongs to and the ones it is next to.", "questions": [ { "id": "kind-and-parents-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes the kind of a technical drawing, and in what units or vocabulary?", "kind": "definition", "answer_data": [ "identifiers", "types and classes", "values with units", "explicit unknowns" ] }, { "id": "kind-and-parents-q02", "text": "Who or what asserted this about the kind of a technical drawing, by which method, and when was it true?", "kind": "provenance", "answer_data": [ "authority", "method", "evidence", "event time", "knowledge time" ] }, { "id": "kind-and-parents-q03", "text": "What may an agent decide or do once the kind of a technical drawing is known, and what must it refuse?", "kind": "action", "answer_data": [ "permitted actions", "preconditions", "refusals", "escalation" ] } ] }, { "id": "distinguishing-features", "name": "Distinguishing features", "description": "What separates a technical drawing from the things most often confused with it.", "questions": [ { "id": "distinguishing-features-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes what distinguishes a technical drawing, and in what units or vocabulary?", "kind": "definition", "answer_data": [ "identifiers", "types and classes", "values with units", "explicit unknowns" ] }, { "id": "distinguishing-features-q02", "text": "Who or what asserted this about what distinguishes a technical drawing, by which method, and when was it true?", "kind": "provenance", "answer_data": [ "authority", "method", "evidence", "event time", "knowledge time" ] }, { "id": "distinguishing-features-q03", "text": "What may an agent decide or do once what distinguishes a technical drawing is known, and what must it refuse?", "kind": "action", "answer_data": [ "permitted actions", "preconditions", "refusals", "escalation" ] } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "state-and-lifecycle", "name": "State and lifecycle", "description": "The states a technical drawing passes through and the events that move it between them.", "rationale": "Most decisions about a thing depend on what state it is in now, which is a claim with a time on it, not a property.", "layers": [ { "id": "lifecycle-stages", "name": "Lifecycle stages", "description": "From coming into existence to ceasing to be one of these.", "findings": [ { "id": "stages-and-transitions", "name": "Stages and transitions", "description": "The stages worth naming and what moves a technical drawing between them.", "questions": [ { "id": "stages-and-transitions-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes the lifecycle of a technical drawing, and in what units or vocabulary?", "kind": "definition", "answer_data": [ "identifiers", "types and classes", "values with units", "explicit unknowns" ] }, { "id": "stages-and-transitions-q02", "text": "Who or what asserted this about the lifecycle of a technical drawing, by which method, and when was it true?", "kind": "provenance", "answer_data": [ "authority", "method", "evidence", "event time", "knowledge time" ] }, { "id": "stages-and-transitions-q03", "text": "What may an agent decide or do once the lifecycle of a technical drawing is known, and what must it refuse?", "kind": "action", "answer_data": [ "permitted actions", "preconditions", "refusals", "escalation" ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "observations-and-status", "name": "Observations and current status", "description": "What is observed about a technical drawing, how often and by whom.", "findings": [ { "id": "observation-record", "name": "Observation record", "description": "How an observation of a technical drawing is recorded so that it can be superseded rather than overwritten.", "questions": [ { "id": "observation-record-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes an observation of a technical drawing, and in what units or vocabulary?", "kind": "definition", "answer_data": [ "identifiers", "types and classes", "values with units", "explicit unknowns" ] }, { "id": "observation-record-q02", "text": "Who or what asserted this about an observation of a technical drawing, by which method, and when was it true?", "kind": "provenance", "answer_data": [ "authority", "method", "evidence", "event time", "knowledge time" ] }, { "id": "observation-record-q03", "text": "What may an agent decide or do once an observation of a technical drawing is known, and what must it refuse?", "kind": "action", "answer_data": [ "permitted actions", "preconditions", "refusals", "escalation" ] } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "process-and-outcome", "name": "Process, inputs and outcome", "description": "How a technical drawing proceeds, what it needs and what it leaves behind.", "rationale": "An activity is known by its steps and its results, and both have to be recordable while it is still running.", "layers": [ { "id": "steps-and-sequence", "name": "Steps and sequence", "description": "The steps of a technical drawing, their order and what may run in parallel.", "findings": [ { "id": "steps-and-preconditions", "name": "Steps, preconditions and completion", "description": "What has to be true before each step of a technical drawing and what marks it done.", "questions": [ { "id": "steps-and-preconditions-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes a step of a technical drawing, and in what units or vocabulary?", "kind": "definition", "answer_data": [ "identifiers", "types and classes", "values with units", "explicit unknowns" ] }, { "id": "steps-and-preconditions-q02", "text": "Who or what asserted this about a step of a technical drawing, by which method, and when was it true?", "kind": "provenance", "answer_data": [ "authority", "method", "evidence", "event time", "knowledge time" ] }, { "id": "steps-and-preconditions-q03", "text": "What may an agent decide or do once a step of a technical drawing is known, and what must it refuse?", "kind": "action", "answer_data": [ "permitted actions", "preconditions", "refusals", "escalation" ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "inputs-and-results", "name": "Inputs, resources and results", "description": "What a technical drawing consumes and what it produces.", "findings": [ { "id": "inputs-and-outputs", "name": "Inputs, outputs and side effects", "description": "The resources a technical drawing takes and the results it leaves, wanted or not.", "questions": [ { "id": "inputs-and-outputs-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes the inputs and results of a technical drawing, and in what units or vocabulary?", "kind": "definition", "answer_data": [ "identifiers", "types and classes", "values with units", "explicit unknowns" ] }, { "id": "inputs-and-outputs-q02", "text": "Who or what asserted this about the inputs and results of a technical drawing, by which method, and when was it true?", "kind": "provenance", "answer_data": [ "authority", "method", "evidence", "event time", "knowledge time" ] }, { "id": "inputs-and-outputs-q03", "text": "What may an agent decide or do once the inputs and results of a technical drawing is known, and what must it refuse?", "kind": "action", "answer_data": [ "permitted actions", "preconditions", "refusals", "escalation" ] } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "definitions-in-contest", "name": "Definitions and who holds them", "description": "What technical drawing is taken to mean, and by whom.", "rationale": "When a field disagrees about a concept, the disagreement is the content. A model that picks one definition silently destroys the information.", "layers": [ { "id": "competing-definitions", "name": "Competing definitions", "description": "The main readings and the traditions behind them.", "findings": [ { "id": "definition-map", "name": "Definitions and their holders", "description": "Each definition with the school or body that holds it.", "questions": [ { "id": "definition-map-q01", "text": "Which definitions of technical drawing are in use, and which tradition or body holds each?", "kind": "definition" }, { "id": "definition-map-q02", "text": "What turns on the difference between them in practice?", "kind": "boundary" } ] } ] }, { "id": "operationalisation", "name": "Operationalisation", "description": "How it is measured or applied when it has to be.", "findings": [ { "id": "operational-record", "name": "Measures and proxies", "description": "Instruments and indicators used to stand in for it.", "questions": [ { "id": "operational-record-q01", "text": "How is technical drawing operationalised or measured in practice, and by what instrument?", "kind": "measurement" }, { "id": "operational-record-q02", "text": "What does that operationalisation leave out, and when does that matter?", "kind": "boundary" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "instances-and-use", "name": "Instances, use and consequence", "description": "What counts as an instance of technical drawing and what follows from calling something that.", "rationale": "Applying a concept is an act with consequences, so a model must say what the label licenses and what it does not.", "layers": [ { "id": "instances", "name": "What counts as an instance", "description": "Clear cases, borderline cases and non-cases.", "findings": [ { "id": "instance-tests", "name": "Tests for an instance", "description": "What would settle whether something falls under it.", "questions": [ { "id": "instance-tests-q01", "text": "What would settle whether something is an instance of technical drawing?", "kind": "boundary" }, { "id": "instance-tests-q02", "text": "Which borderline cases are argued about, and on what grounds?", "kind": "definition" } ] } ] }, { "id": "consequence", "name": "Consequence of application", "description": "Rights, duties or decisions that follow from the label.", "findings": [ { "id": "consequence-record", "name": "What the label licenses", "description": "What an agent may do once something is classified this way.", "questions": [ { "id": "consequence-record-q01", "text": "What follows practically once something is treated as technical drawing?", "kind": "action" }, { "id": "consequence-record-q02", "text": "What must an agent not infer from the label alone?", "kind": "action" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "provenance-and-evidence", "name": "Provenance, evidence and time", "description": "Where every claim about a technical drawing came from and when it held.", "rationale": "A claim without a source and a time cannot be superseded, only overwritten, and an agent that overwrites loses the ability to explain itself.", "layers": [ { "id": "source-and-authority", "name": "Source and authority", "description": "Who said it, on what evidence, and how strongly.", "findings": [ { "id": "claim-provenance", "name": "Claim provenance and confidence", "description": "The authority behind each claim about a technical drawing and how confident it is.", "questions": [ { "id": "claim-provenance-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes a claim about a technical drawing, and in what units or vocabulary?", "kind": "definition", "answer_data": [ "identifiers", "types and classes", "values with units", "explicit unknowns" ] }, { "id": "claim-provenance-q02", "text": "Who or what asserted this about a claim about a technical drawing, by which method, and when was it true?", "kind": "provenance", "answer_data": [ "authority", "method", "evidence", "event time", "knowledge time" ] }, { "id": "claim-provenance-q03", "text": "What may an agent decide or do once a claim about a technical drawing is known, and what must it refuse?", "kind": "action", "answer_data": [ "permitted actions", "preconditions", "refusals", "escalation" ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "time-and-versions", "name": "Time, versions and supersession", "description": "When a claim was true, when it was learnt, and what replaced it.", "findings": [ { "id": "validity-and-supersession", "name": "Validity period and supersession", "description": "How an old claim about a technical drawing is retired without being erased.", "questions": [ { "id": "validity-and-supersession-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes the validity of a claim about a technical drawing, and in what units or vocabulary?", "kind": "definition", "answer_data": [ "identifiers", "types and classes", "values with units", "explicit unknowns" ] }, { "id": "validity-and-supersession-q02", "text": "Who or what asserted this about the validity of a claim about a technical drawing, by which method, and when was it true?", "kind": "provenance", "answer_data": [ "authority", "method", "evidence", "event time", "knowledge time" ] }, { "id": "validity-and-supersession-q03", "text": "What may an agent decide or do once the validity of a claim about a technical drawing is known, and what must it refuse?", "kind": "action", "answer_data": [ "permitted actions", "preconditions", "refusals", "escalation" ] } ] } ] } ] } ] }, "statistics": { "bundles": 6, "layers": 12, "findings": 14, "questions": 38 } } } }