← Back to catalogue
Published

Task

vr.wm-act-006 · wm-act-006-task

Provide a format-neutral governed context model for a task instance: a stateful, assignable unit of work with identity, authorisation, lifecycle, timing, inputs, outputs and evidence, reusable by human and automated performers.

World Models Activities and processes ACT.TSK

Bundle → Layer → Finding → Questions Filled

6 bundles · 13 layers · 30 findings · 104 questions

Identity and definition What this task is, how it is identified, which reusable definition it instantiates, and how it is classified.

Task identity and definition binding

Identifier authority, uniqueness scope, correlation across systems, and the versioned link from instance to definition.

Task instance identity and identifier correlation

Which identifier is authoritative for a task instance, who mints it, in what namespace it is unique, and how it correlates with identifiers held by other systems.

  1. Which system of record holds the authoritative identifier for this task instance, and what is that identifier value? identity
  2. Within what namespace is the identifier guaranteed unique, and is uniqueness global or scoped to one server? constraint
  3. Which additional business, group or external identifiers correlate this task across exchanging systems? interoperability
  4. If the work repeats, is each occurrence separately identified or derived from one recurring definition? identity

Binding to a reusable task definition and its version

Which definition, process model or case model the instance realises, at which version, and how divergence from it is authorised and detected.

  1. Which reusable task definition or process model does this instance instantiate, and at which pinned version? definition
  2. Where does the running instance deviate from its definition, and who authorised the deviation? validation
  3. How are later changes to the definition propagated to instances that are already running? lifecycle
  4. Was this task planned in advance by a definition or added discretionarily during execution? decision

Descriptive identity and confidentiality class

Human-readable name, description, categories and iCalendar CLASS distinguish the Task for people and access control without serving as identity.

  1. What title or summary and free-text description should a human or agent use to recognize this Task? definition
  2. Which categories, tags or outlook-style labels classify this Task for queues and search? classification
  3. Is the Task public, private or confidential, and what privacy rules follow from that class? privacy

Classification, priority and severity

Controlled typing of the work and the ranking scales that drive queueing and escalation.

Task type, category and performer kind

The controlled codes that classify the kind of work and whether it is to be performed by a person, an automated agent, or both.

  1. What controlled code classifies the kind of work this task represents? classification
  2. Is the work to be performed by a human, by an automated agent or service, or by a combination? classification
  3. Which taxonomy governs these codes, who may extend it, and how are local extensions marked? authority

Priority scale, urgency and severity

How ranking is expressed, in which direction the scale runs, and how business impact is kept distinct from scheduling urgency.

  1. Which priority scale is in force, in which direction does it run, and what does an absent value mean? measurement
  2. Is business impact recorded separately from scheduling urgency on this task? classification
  3. How is the local priority mapped when exchanged with a system using a different scale, and what precision is lost? interoperability
  4. Who may change a task's priority after creation, and is the change recorded with a reason? authority
Authority, oversight and assignment Why the task exists, what authorises it, who is accountable, and who may or must perform it.

Authorisation, intent and oversight

Actionability level, the authorising reference, and the accountability chain when work is delegated to people or automated agents.

Authorisation reference and actionability level

Whether the task is a proposal, a plan or an authorised order, which instrument authorises it, and what limits that authorisation carries.

  1. At what level of actionability does this task exist: proposal, plan, or authorised order? authority
  2. Which request, work order or higher-level authorisation caused this task to exist, and is it still valid? provenance
  3. What does the authorisation permit and forbid in terms of repetitions, period and named recipient? constraint

Accountability, oversight and automated performer limits

Who stays accountable when execution is delegated, what an automated performer may do unattended, and which role combinations are prohibited.

  1. Which party remains accountable for the outcome when execution is delegated to another person or to an automated agent? ownership
  2. What may an automated performer do without a human confirmation step, and how is that boundary enforced? security
  3. Which combinations of requester, performer and approver are prohibited on the same task? constraint
  4. Who may intervene to suspend, reassign or terminate the task, and on what stated grounds? decision

Based-on authorization versus focus object

FHIR basedOn is a higher-level authorization such as a CarePlan. focus is the request being fulfilled or resource being manipulated. They are never the same. for is the beneficiary. doNotPerform inverts the requested action within tight time or phase bounds.

  1. What higher-level authorization or request created this Task, if any? relationship
  2. What object, request or resource is this Task acting on, and must subtasks be used if more than one resource is manipulated? composition
  3. Who benefits from the Task, and is the Task asking that the action not occur? constraint

Assignment, claiming and reassignment

How the performer set is resolved, how ownership is taken and released, and how work is delegated or forwarded.

Role assignment and performer eligibility

Which parties hold which role on the task, how the potential performer set is resolved, and what eligibility a performer must satisfy.

  1. Which parties hold each role on this task: initiator, potential owners, actual owner, stakeholders, administrators and excluded owners? ownership
  2. What competence, qualification, licence or system capability must a performer hold to be eligible? requirement
  3. How is the potential performer set resolved: by literal party list, by group query, or by expression over task data? process
  4. Is an unassigned task valid, and what happens when the potential performer set resolves to empty? exception

Claiming, release, delegation and forwarding

The operations that move ownership between parties, the permissions that govern them, and whether responsibility travels with the work.

  1. What operation makes a party the actual owner, and may more than one party hold the task simultaneously? process
  2. Under what conditions may an owner release the task, and to which state does it return? exception
  3. Who is permitted to receive a delegated or forwarded task, and does accountability transfer with it? access
  4. How is a performer's response to an assignment recorded when it differs from the task's own status? state
Lifecycle, state and exceptions The governed state vocabulary, blocking conditions, transition history and unsuccessful endings.

Canonical state model and blocking

The state vocabulary in force, which states are terminal, and how blocked work is represented.

State vocabulary, terminality and status qualification

The governed set of states, which are terminal, and how coded state is qualified by a reason and a domain-specific business status.

  1. What is the task's current state in the governed vocabulary, and when was that state entered? state
  2. Which states are terminal, and may a terminal task be reopened or must a successor task be created? lifecycle
  3. What reason and domain-specific business status qualify the coded state beyond the enumerated value? definition
  4. How does the local state map onto each aligned external vocabulary, and which distinctions cannot be preserved? interoperability

Suspension, blocking and outstanding input requirements

Why progress has stopped, exactly what must happen to resume, and how long a stalled task may remain in that condition.

  1. What is blocking progress: missing input, missing authorisation, an unmet dependency, or a deliberate hold? exception
  2. What exact condition must be satisfied for work to resume, and who is able to satisfy it? constraint
  3. How long may the task remain blocked before escalation or automatic termination applies? temporal

Transition history and unsuccessful endings

The recorded sequence of state changes and the classification and handling of failure, rejection and cancellation.

State transition events and tamper-evident history

What is recorded for each transition, how event time is kept distinct from recording time, and how completeness of the history is demonstrated.

  1. What is captured for each state transition: prior state, new state, actor, reason and time? event
  2. Is the time a transition occurred recorded separately from the time the system observed or ingested it? temporal
  3. Is the transition history complete and tamper-evident, and how would a missing entry be detected? evidence
  4. Which transitions on subtasks are propagated to the parent task's history, and which stay local? relationship

Failure, rejection, cancellation and error classification

How unsuccessful endings are distinguished from one another, what fault detail is retained, and what compensating action follows.

  1. How is an unsuccessful ending classified: failed, rejected, cancelled, obsolete, or entered in error? classification
  2. What fault or error payload is retained, and is it safe to disclose to the requester? evidence
  3. What compensating, retry or successor action follows, and does it reuse the same task identity? process
Time, composition and dependency When the task is anchored in time, how it decomposes and groups, and how it depends on other work.

Temporal anchors, deadlines and recurrence

The time values a task carries, the deadlines that constrain it, the escalations they trigger, and repetition rules.

Temporal anchors and timestamp discipline

The set of time anchors a task carries, their required format and offset handling, and which clock prevails in a dispute.

  1. Which time anchors are recorded: authored, planned start, due, actual start, actual end and last modified? temporal
  2. Are all time values expressed with seconds and an explicit offset, and how is an unknown local offset represented? validation
  3. In which local time zone or civil calendar is a deadline meaningful for the performer? spatial
  4. Which clock or system prevails when two systems report different times for the same transition? provenance

Deadlines, escalation actions and recurrence

Which deadlines bind the task, what fires when they pass, and how repeating work is instantiated and closed.

  1. Which deadlines apply, latest start or latest completion, and are they contractual or advisory? requirement
  2. What escalation fires when a deadline passes, to whom is it directed, and how often does it repeat? process
  3. Does this work repeat on a rule, and how is each occurrence instantiated and closed? temporal
  4. When both an absolute due time and a duration are present, which one governs? constraint

Decomposition, dependency and plan placement

Parent and subtask structure, typed dependencies with lead and lag, and the reference to an independently versioned plan.

Parent, subtasks and grouping

How a task sits inside a parent, project or work order, how subtasks execute, and how their outcomes assemble into the parent result.

  1. Which parent task, work order or project does this task belong to, and is that membership exclusive? composition
  2. Are subtasks executed in parallel or in sequence, and are they created automatically or on demand? process
  3. What condition over subtask outcomes completes the parent, and how is the parent result assembled? lifecycle

Typed dependencies, lead and lag

How ordering constraints between tasks are typed, how lead or lag is expressed, and how cycles and cross-system references are handled.

  1. What dependency type links this task to another: finish-to-start, start-to-start, finish-to-finish, start-to-finish, or a plain dependency? relationship
  2. What lead or lag applies to the dependency, and in which duration units? measurement
  3. How are dependency cycles and dangling references detected and rejected? validation
  4. How is a dependency on a task held in another system or organisation expressed and resolved? interoperability

Reference to plan or schedule

How the task points at an independently versioned plan, and which side prevails when planned and actual timing disagree.

  1. Which plan or schedule version places this task, and is that reference pinned to a version? relationship
  2. How is variance between planned and actual timing measured and reported back to the plan? measurement
  3. When the plan and the task disagree about dates, which one is authoritative? authority
Work content, results and evidence What goes into the task, what counts as done, what comes out, and what proves it happened.

Inputs, acceptance criteria and execution constraints

What must be supplied, what must be true to call the work done, and the conditions and resources execution requires.

Typed inputs, parameters and subject focus

The typed information a task consumes, when each value is bound, what the task acts upon, and how inputs are validated.

  1. What typed inputs, parameters and attachments must be present before work can start? composition
  2. Which input values are bound at creation and which are supplied during execution? process
  3. How are inputs validated against the task definition, and what happens when validation fails? validation
  4. What entity does this task act upon, and for whose benefit is it performed? relationship

Completion criteria, acceptance and verification

What must hold for the task to count as complete, who accepts the result, and whether acceptance is separate from completion.

  1. What conditions must hold for the task to count as complete, and are they machine-checkable? requirement
  2. Who accepts, reviews or verifies the result, and is acceptance a separate step from completion? authority
  3. Is partial or conditional completion permitted, and how is it represented without misreporting success? state

Preconditions, resources, instruments and location

The conditions that must hold to execute, the resources and instruments required, and where performance must take place.

  1. What preconditions, safety rules or policy constraints must hold before and during execution? constraint
  2. Which resources, tools, systems or instruments are required, and are any reserved exclusively for this task? requirement
  3. Where must the work be performed, and is that location a hard constraint or advisory? spatial

Outputs and measurement

What the task produces and how progress and effort are quantified.

Outputs, produced artifacts and derivation

What the task produces, how each output is identified and linked to the inputs it came from, and whether outputs may change after closure.

  1. What outputs, artifacts or deliverables does the task produce, and is each individually identified? composition
  2. How is each output linked to the task that generated it and to the inputs it was derived from? provenance
  3. Are outputs immutable once the task reaches a terminal state, or may they be superseded? quality

Progress reporting and effort accounting

How progress is quantified, what effort was estimated and consumed, and how far a self-reported figure can be trusted.

  1. How is progress quantified, on what scale, and who is permitted to update it? measurement
  2. What effort or duration was estimated and what has actually been consumed, in which units? measurement
  3. How reliable is a self-reported progress figure, and what independent signal corroborates it? quality

Provenance and evidence

Who did what, using what, and what proves the claim.

Execution provenance and attribution

Which agent performed each step, in which role and on whose behalf, and which entities were used and generated.

  1. Which agent actually performed each step, in which role, and on whose behalf did it act? provenance
  2. Which entities were used and which were generated, with start and end times for the activity? evidence
  3. Which plan or definition qualified the agent's association with this task? relationship

Evidence capture, integrity and sufficiency

What evidence must be captured to prove the work was done as specified, how its integrity is protected, and who judges sufficiency.

  1. What evidence must be captured to prove the work was performed as specified? evidence
  2. How is evidence integrity protected against later alteration? security
  3. What makes the captured evidence sufficient for audit, and who decides sufficiency? quality
Access, retention and interoperability Who may see and change the task, how long it is kept, and how it exchanges safely with other systems.

Access, confidentiality and retention

Visibility rules, classification, exceptional access, and how long task content survives closure.

Visibility, classification and exceptional access

Who may see or change the task and its content, what classification applies, and how emergency access is authorised and reviewed.

  1. Who may see the task, its inputs and its outputs, and does visibility follow role assignment on the task? access
  2. What confidentiality classification applies to the task, and does it differ from that of its attachments? security
  3. How is emergency or break-glass access authorised, recorded and afterwards reviewed? exception

Personal data, retention period and erasure

Which task fields can carry personal data, how long the record and its history are kept, and how deletion is performed without destroying audit integrity.

  1. Which task fields can carry personal data about performers or subjects, and are they minimised? privacy
  2. How long are the task record, its history and its attachments retained after closure, and under whose authority? retention
  3. Is deletion logical or physical, and what tombstone remains for audit after erasure? retention
  4. How does a legal hold or investigation suspend a scheduled deletion, and who lifts it? exception

Alignment and exchange integrity

Crosswalks to external task vocabularies and the controls that keep exchanged copies consistent.

Alignment crosswalks and conformance evidence

Which external vocabularies the model is aligned to, which fields and states survive a round trip, and what evidence any conformance claim rests on.

  1. Which external task vocabularies is this model aligned to, and at which versions? interoperability
  2. Which fields and states survive a round trip to each aligned vocabulary without loss? validation
  3. What evidence supports a conformance claim, and where is alignment only partial? evidence

Concurrency, idempotency and ordering on exchange

How competing updates, duplicate requests and out-of-order status delivery are detected and resolved between systems.

  1. How are concurrent updates to the same task detected and resolved: sequence number, revision token, or last writer wins? constraint
  2. How are duplicate create or transition requests recognised and made idempotent? process
  3. How is out-of-order delivery of status updates detected and corrected? temporal
  4. What happens when an update arrives for a task that has already reached a terminal state? exception

Classifiers Filled

Family
World Models
Category
Activities and processes
Entry kind
aggregate
Navigation path
NAV.ACT.TSK
Domain
ACT.TSK
Industry
Cross-industry
Tags
taskact.tsk

What it is Filled

The model governs the task instance as a consistency boundary: the task record plus the parts that have no independent identity outside it (status history, role assignments, deadlines, typed inputs and outputs, progress measurements, provenance entries). Reusable task definitions, plans, work orders, projects, parties and produced documents are separate models referenced by typed edges. Storage and interface (JSON, YAML, Markdown, Git, MCP, MongoDB) are projections of these semantics, not part of them.

In scope

  • Identity of a task instance and correlation of identifiers across exchanging systems
  • Binding of an instance to a reusable task definition and its version
  • Classification: task type, performer kind, priority scale and severity
  • Authorisation and actionability level (proposal, plan, order) and the authorising reference
  • Role assignment, claiming, release, delegation and forwarding
  • Canonical state model, terminality, blocking and failure classification
  • State transition events with event time and recording time separated
  • Deadlines, escalations, recurrence and temporal anchors
  • Decomposition into subtasks and typed dependencies with lead or lag
  • Typed inputs, completion and acceptance criteria, outputs and produced artifacts
  • Progress and effort measurement, execution provenance and evidence
  • Access control, confidentiality classification, retention and deletion of the task record
  • Alignment crosswalks to external task vocabularies and exchange integrity controls

Out of scope

  • Project and programme portfolio semantics (WM-ACT-005)
  • Plan and schedule authoring, baselining and versioning (WM-ACT-008)
  • Work order raising, contractual authorisation and billing (WM-ACT-007)
  • Process and case definition languages themselves (BPMN process models, CMMN case models)
  • Party, organisation, role directory and competency registries
  • Document, dataset and physical deliverable content models referenced as outputs
  • Calendar event and appointment scheduling of people's time
  • Issue, defect and change-request domain semantics beyond alignment
  • Cost, rate, invoicing and financial accounting of work
  • Robot motion-level or actuator-level decomposition of physical actions

Why it exists Filled

Provide a format-neutral governed context model for a task instance: a stateful, assignable unit of work with identity, authorisation, lifecycle, timing, inputs, outputs and evidence, reusable by human and automated performers.

Distinguishing features Filled

  • A task instance is stateful and assignable; a task definition or template is reusable and stateless.
  • Separates the time an event happened from the time it was recorded.
  • Can be performed by people or by automated agents under the same state model.

What robots and AI may and may not do Filled

Must not

  • Act on a task that is only a proposal as if it were an order.
  • Mark a task complete without meeting its completion criteria.
  • Reassign a task to someone outside the permitted roles.
  • Rewrite the status history.

Only with a human decision

  • Accepting outputs where acceptance criteria require judgement.
  • Escalations that change deadlines or priority set by someone else.

May

  • Claim, start, complete or release a task assigned to its role.
  • Record progress, outputs and evidence.
  • Create subtasks within its authority.

Moral aspects Filled

  • Task data shows how individual people work; using it for surveillance or ranking needs clear purpose and consent.
  • Automated performers must be identifiable, so people know when a machine did the work.

Who is affected

  • People performing tasks
  • Requesters and beneficiaries of the work

Owners Filled

Steward

The task owner (requester or process owner) owns the instance; assignees own their performance records.

Roles

Model steward
Maintain this model, its state model definition and its vocabularies; Approve breaking changes and publish migration notes; Re-verify alignment crosswalks when a target vocabulary version changes
Task initiator or requester
Create tasks with intent, type and authorising reference; Supply required inputs and acceptance criteria; Respond to requests for missing input or authorisation
Task performer (human or automated agent)
Claim, execute and report progress on assigned tasks; Produce outputs and capture required evidence; Declare blocking conditions instead of silently stalling
Task stakeholder or business administrator
Oversee outcomes and intervene on escalation; Reassign, suspend or terminate tasks within declared authority; Resolve conflicts between plan dates and task dates
Auditor or records officer
Verify completeness and integrity of transition history and evidence; Apply retention classes, legal holds and erasure decisions; Review break-glass access events
Integration engineer
Maintain crosswalks and loss notes for each aligned vocabulary; Operate concurrency, idempotency and ordering controls on exchange; Report unmappable values back to the model steward

Master systems

  • Work management or BPM system
  • Issue tracker

Links to other meta-models Filled

child

  • WM-ACT-005 Project - A task may be contained by a project as one unit of its work; the task holds the container reference and the project owns objectives, budget and governance.
  • WM-ACT-007 Work Order - A work order authorises and groups tasks; the task records the authorising reference and its actionability level while the work order owns the authorisation chain.

references

  • WM-ACT-008 Plan or Schedule - The task cites a version-pinned plan that places it in time and reports variance back, without copying plan content.
  • Party, organisation and agent identity model (sibling; identifier assigned by the adopting Dimension) - All role assignments, delegations and on-behalf-of chains resolve to parties governed elsewhere; the task stores references and roles only.
  • Process and case definition models (BPMN process, CMMN case) - The instance cites the definition it realises; the definition languages and their interchange formats remain outside this model.

composes

  • Artifact, document and deliverable model (sibling; identifier assigned by the adopting Dimension) - Produced outputs and attachments are independently identified artifacts composed into the task's result set by generation links.
  • Provenance and audit event mix-in - Supplies the agent, activity and entity assertions plus audit entry structure reused by the task's transition history.
  • Timestamp and interval mix-in - Supplies the RFC 3339 timestamp discipline, interval structure and the separation of event time from recording time used across every layer.

extends

  • Generic action or activity pattern model - Task specialises the general action pattern of actor, object, instrument, result and status by adding assignment, deadlines, terminality and acceptance.

aligned

  • FHIR Task (HL7 FHIR R5) - Alignment target for status, intent, businessStatus, basedOn, partOf, focus, owner, executionPeriod, restriction and input or output; alignment is partial and recorded in a crosswalk.
  • iCalendar VTODO with relationship extensions - Alignment target for UID, DTSTAMP, DUE, PERCENT-COMPLETE, STATUS, PRIORITY, RRULE and the typed dependency relationships with lead or lag.
  • WS-HumanTask task instance - Alignment target for the human task lifecycle, generic human roles, people assignment, deadlines with escalation and composite subtask completion.
  • A2A Task - Alignment target for agent-executed tasks: server-generated identity, context grouping, interruption states and produced artifacts with terminal-state immutability.
  • OSLC ChangeRequest - Alignment target for work records expressed with boolean state predicates and typed links; the mapping to a single enumerated state is lossy and recorded as such.

neighbor

  • Task definition or template (BPMN task, CMMN task, FHIR ActivityDefinition, WS-HumanTask task definition) - A definition is a reusable, versioned specification of work; this model governs the instance that instantiates it and tracks its execution state. The instance carries a version-pinned reference to the definition, never a copy that can silently diverge.
  • Project (WM-ACT-005) - A project is a temporary endeavour with objectives, budget and governance; a task is a single unit of assignable work inside it. Project membership is an edge on the task, not an attribute the task owns.
  • Work order (WM-ACT-007) - A work order is the authorising instrument that permits and groups execution; the task records the authorisation reference and its actionability level but does not model the authorising instrument's own approval chain.
  • Plan or schedule (WM-ACT-008) - A plan is independently versioned and places tasks in time; the task holds planned and actual anchors plus a version-pinned plan reference. When planned dates disagree with the plan, the plan is authoritative unless the Dimension states otherwise.
  • Provenance activity record (PROV-O Activity) - A PROV Activity is a retrospective assertion about something that occurred; a task is prospective and assignable, with deadlines, owners and terminal failure states. The task emits provenance; it is not itself only provenance.
  • Calendar event (iCalendar VEVENT) and appointment - An event occupies a time block and has its own status vocabulary (TENTATIVE, CONFIRMED, CANCELLED); a to-do or task has completion semantics (NEEDS-ACTION, IN-PROCESS, COMPLETED, CANCELLED), a due time and percent complete.
  • Change request or issue (OSLC ChangeRequest) - A change request is a domain record about a requested change with review predicates; a task is the unit of work that may implement it. Alignment is one-directional and lossy because OSLC expresses state as independent boolean predicates.
  • Message or notification (WS-HumanTask notification, A2A Message) - A notification is one-way and expects no response or completion tracking; a task is stateful and must reach a terminal state. Messages requesting missing input attach to a task but are not tasks.
  • Outcome or procedure record (FHIR Procedure) - An outcome record asserts a change made to a subject; a task tracks whether the work was requested, performed and completed. Both may exist for the same real-world action and must not be merged.

What else AI and robots need to interact with it Filled

Identity and identifiers required Filled

  • Authoritative master-system identifier issued by the system of record that owns the task instance, for example the workflow engine, ticketing system or agent server that created it; where the producing server mandates that it alone generates task identifiers, that server is the master system.
  • Governed global identifier or IRI, such as an iCalendar-style globally unique UID or an HTTPS IRI minted under the adopting Dimension's namespace, used when no master system exists.
  • UUID or ULID assigned by the adopting Dimension, recorded together with its minting authority and minting time.
  • A date, due time, title, sequence position, assignee name or queue position is never an identifier and must not be used as one, including for occurrences of a recurring task.

Direct properties not applicable Not applicable

Not applicable

Institutional or informational subject: no invented physical properties.

Recognition optional Filled

  • A task has a performer role, a state, a due time and completion criteria.
  • Confused with a calendar appointment (time booking) and a work order (contractual authorization).

Capabilities and actions required Filled

  • Create task instance: Mint a task instance from a definition or ad hoc request, establishing identity, intent, classification and authorising reference.
  • Resolve assignment and claim ownership: Resolve the potential performer set, and record a party taking or releasing ownership of the task.
  • Transition task state: Apply a guarded state change against the declared state model, rejecting transitions that are not permitted or that target a terminal record.
  • Record blocking and request missing input: Move the task into a blocked condition, state the resume condition, and issue a request to the party able to satisfy it.
  • Evaluate completion and record acceptance: Assess outputs against completion criteria, record the acceptance or rejection decision, and complete or reopen the task accordingly.
  • Escalate on deadline expiry: Detect a passed start or completion deadline and execute the configured escalation, including reassignment or notification.
  • Resolve dependencies and gaps: Evaluate typed dependency edges with their lead or lag to determine whether the task may start or finish, and report cycles.
  • Emit provenance and audit records: Write activity, agent and entity assertions plus access and change audit entries for the task, with event and recording times kept separate.
  • Project task to an aligned vocabulary: Transform the task record into an aligned external representation using the pinned crosswalk, reporting every value that cannot be carried.
  • Apply retention, hold and erasure: Evaluate the retention class against the closure date, honour legal holds, and perform logical or physical erasure leaving an auditable tombstone.
  • Delegate or forward Task: Transfer potential or actual ownership to another person or group without creating a new Task identity.
  • Cancel, fail, reject or enter-in-error: Terminate abnormally, distinguish external cancellation, execution failure, pre-start rejection and never-valid entered-in-error.

Hazards and failure modes required Filled

  • Duplicate execution when two performers claim one task.
  • Missed deadlines when escalations are not tracked.

Standards and interfaces required Filled

  • WS-HumanTask.
  • BPMN and CMMN task semantics.
  • HL7 FHIR Task.

Context of use required Filled

  • Data-protection, worker-monitoring and works-council constraints on recording performer identity and progress are jurisdiction-specific; attempts to retrieve legislative text failed in this pass, so no statutory claim is made and the adopting Dimension must supply the governing instrument.
  • Deadlines are meaningful only against a local civil calendar, working-hours calendar and time zone, which vary by region and by employer; the model records the time zone of performance but does not embed any working calendar.
  • Healthcare-specific alignment through FHIR assumes a clinical deployment; outside healthcare the FHIR crosswalk is optional and its encounter and insurance concepts have no counterpart.
  • Language, script and text direction of presentation elements and comments are locale-dependent and are carried as data rather than constrained by this model.
  • Records-retention schedules and legal-hold procedures differ by jurisdiction and sector; the retention class is a pointer into a Dimension-supplied schedule, not a period asserted here.
  • Healthcare examples (encounter, beneficiary, insurance) follow HL7 FHIR and are optional outside clinical Dimensions.
  • Confidentiality CLASS follows iCalendar PUBLIC/PRIVATE/CONFIDENTIAL; regional privacy law (for example GDPR erasure versus audit retention) is a Dimension policy overlay, not a universal Task rule.
  • WS-HumanTask people assignment assumes an organizational directory whose schema is out of scope.
  • Time zones in Graph dateTimeTimeZone must be projected to RFC 3339 instants with explicit offset or Z for canonical storage.

Sources Filled

  1. Web Services – Human Task (WS-HumanTask) Specification Version 1.1 - OASIS BPEL4People Technical Committee
  2. FHIR Release 5 Resource Task - Health Level Seven International (HL7)
  3. RFC 5545 Internet Calendaring and Scheduling Core Object Specification (iCalendar) - Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)
  4. RFC 9253 Support for iCalendar Relationships - Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)
  5. RFC 3339 Date and Time on the Internet: Timestamps - Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)
  6. PROV-O: The PROV Ontology - World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)
  7. Activity Streams 2.0 Vocabulary - World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)
  8. OSLC Change Management Version 3.0 Part 2: Vocabulary - OASIS Open Projects (OSLC Open Project)
  9. Agent2Agent (A2A) Protocol Specification - A2A Project (Linux Foundation)
  10. Business Process Model and Notation (BPMN) Version 2.0.2 - Object Management Group (OMG)
  11. schema.org ActionStatusType and Action - Schema.org community (W3C Schema.org Community Group)
  12. NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5, Security and Privacy Controls for Information Systems and Organizations - National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)
  13. OSLC Change Management Version 3.0 Part 1: Specification - OASIS Open Projects (OSLC Open Project)
  14. Case Management Model and Notation (CMMN) Version 1.1 - Object Management Group (OMG)
  15. iCalendar RFC 5545 Section 3.8.1.11 STATUS (reference reproduction) - iCalendar.org
  16. HL7 FHIR Release 5 Resource Task - HL7 International
  17. HL7 FHIR Release 5 Task Detailed Descriptions - HL7 International
  18. HL7 FHIR ValueSet Task Status - HL7 International
  19. schema.org Action - Schema.org
  20. RFC 5545 Internet Calendaring and Scheduling Core Object Specification, section 3.6.2 To-Do Component - Internet Engineering Task Force
  21. Microsoft Graph v1.0 todoTask resource type - Microsoft
  22. OMG Business Process Model and Notation Specification Version 2.0.2 - Object Management Group
  23. ISO 21502:2020 Project, programme and portfolio management — Guidance on project management - International Organization for Standardization

Open questions

  • Prohibitive task semantics (a task requesting that an action not occur, bounded by period or phase): grounded so far only in FHIR doNotPerform. Seek a second independent primary source before treating negative tasks as a canonical structural feature rather than an alignment nuance.
  • State propagation across composition: whether suspending a parent suspends its children and resuming restores them, and whether a stop from in-progress returns the task to ready for reassignment. Ground against the WS-HumanTask composite-task text and the FHIR status transition guidance.
  • Effort estimation, consumption and variance units, plus percent-complete semantics under parallel and mixed routing patterns. Neither provider retrieved a normative source; resolve with a sibling effort and cost model rather than by extending this aggregate.
  • Work breakdown structure and activity vocabulary from the project-management standards family, including ISO 21502 clauses beyond the public work-package definition. Blocked by HTTP 403 in one pack and by paywall in the other.
  • Unfetched calendaring and workflow standards named as omissions: JSCalendar task conversion, RFC 5546 iTIP scheduling, CalDAV access, and IHE XDW cross-enterprise workflow. Check whether any of these contradicts the accepted temporal or composition findings.
  • Safety-critical and regulated-AI obligations governing delegation of work to automated performers, and jurisdictional worker-monitoring and works-council constraints on recording performer identity and progress. No legislative or sector source was retrieved in either pass.
  • Re-verify the Microsoft Graph identifier re-key behaviour on list move against the live vendor documentation, since the identifier-stability conflict admitted into the merged conflict set rests on a single tier-2 vendor page.
  • Cost, rate, invoicing and financial variance of work, deferred to a finance or cost model.
  • Competency, skill taxonomy and certification management beyond an eligibility reference.
  • Queue optimisation, workload balancing and dispatch algorithms, which are operational policy rather than task context.
  • Safety-critical and regulated-AI obligations for delegating work to automated performers; no legislative or sector source was retrieved in this pass.
  • Robotics motion-level or actuator-level decomposition, consistent with the registry robotics factor of zero for this model.
  • Negotiation, bidding and market-based task allocation protocols.
  • Localisation and internationalisation of presentation text beyond noting that presentation elements exist.
  • Offline and disconnected reconciliation semantics beyond sequence-based ordering.
  • Work breakdown structure vocabulary from ISO project-management standards, which could not be retrieved.
  • Full ISO 21502:2020 clauses beyond the public work-package definition remain paywalled.
  • BPMN 2.0.2 Task types (user, service, script, manual, business-rule, send, receive) were not read from the normative PDF and are not treated as canonical here.
  • OSLC Change Management, IHE XDW, JSCalendar Task conversion, RFC 5546 iTIP scheduling and CalDAV access protocols were not fetched.
  • IETF draft-okutomi-agent-human-interaction is emerging and not used as a primary source.
  • Military METL, legal obligation tasks, education assignments and GTD personal-productivity methods lack primary support in this pack.
  • No single global Task IRI registry exists.
  • Percent-complete semantics under composite routing patterns are only sketched from WS-HumanTask completion conditions.

Machine files

Provenance

world-models research · reviewable-draft

Built from: models/wm-act-006-task/spec.yaml, ver-cy/world-models/card-supplements/wm-act-006-task.json