# Vercy AI instruction - YAML 1.2 (JSON-compatible) { "vercy": "1.0-draft", "publication": { "status": "published", "adjudicationStatus": "reviewable-draft", "publishableCanonical": false, "generatedAt": "2026-10-06T23:06:33Z", "synthesisSha256": "634f4a5ecbcea5afa5f60e6fb920379e36da7ebda568f036805bc60d7aa30ae2", "providerMode": "single-provider-waiver", "providers": [ "Codex" ], "waivedProviders": [ "Claude", "Grok" ] }, "metaModel": { "id": "WM-POL-023", "registryId": "vr.wm-pol-023", "name": "Enforcement Action", "version": "0.1.0", "previousVersions": [], "entryKind": "entity", "family": "World Models", "category": "Society, people and institutions", "industry": [ "Cross-industry" ], "domain": [ "SOC.POL.ENF" ], "tags": [ "enforcement", "action", "soc.pol.enf" ], "status": "published" }, "canonicalUrl": "https://ver.cy/models/wm-pol-023-enforcement-action/", "sourceUrl": "https://github.com/ver-cy/world-models/tree/feat/mega-model-registry/research/runs/wm-pol-023", "model": { "registry_id": "vr.wm-pol-023", "model_id": "WM-POL-023", "name": "Enforcement Action", "entry_kind": "entity", "purpose": "Describe one tracked action to give effect to an evidenced legal decision or obligation under competent authority.", "scope_statement": "A persistent enforcement-action record with its own identity, qualified basis, bounded measure, recorded occurrences and outcome assertions. The registry execution focus is retained. This root may be recorded while authority or prerequisites remain unresolved, but that state grants no permission to act. Proposed data and functions support accountable local recordkeeping only.", "in_scope": [ "Action identity, responsible authority, affected-party references and qualified enforceability assertions", "Measure scope, safeguards, notification evidence, temporal constraints and observed progress", "Review or stay references, financial and nonfinancial outcome evidence, closure and controlled record continuity" ], "out_of_scope": [ "Adjudicating the underlying claim, issuing or changing judgments, orders, sanctions or regulatory decisions", "Investigation, prosecution and full court or administrative case management", "Physical execution, entry, seizure, eviction, detention, weapons or controlled-item handling instructions", "Payment execution, title transfer, asset custody operations and automatic legal deadline or exemption calculations" ], "boundary_notes": [ { "neighbor": "WM-POL-021 Judgment / Legal Decision", "distinction": "The frozen ledger has an incoming REFERENCE from a judgment to an action. The registry parent label does not establish inheritance. This action may reciprocally reference a decision and its version without owning its issuance, merits, appeal lifecycle or validity.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002" ] }, { "neighbor": "WM-POL-017 Administrative Procedure / Case and court proceedings", "distinction": "A case can group several actions; action identity is not the case number alone. Wider regulatory usage includes proceedings and notices; this execution-focused model links those external proceedings without absorbing them.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-005", "SRC-006" ] }, { "neighbor": "WM-POL-020 Evidence Item / Exhibit", "distinction": "Local assertion and provenance links point to external evidence masters. An attached report is neither proof of successful execution nor a locally decided admissibility finding.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-006" ] }, { "neighbor": "Affected parties, assets, payments and obligations", "distinction": "Identity, ownership, custody, payment and obligation masters remain external. The action records scoped claims and outcome references, not a new party, asset or accounting ledger.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-003", "SRC-004" ] } ] }, "sources": [ { "id": "SRC-001", "title": "Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012", "organization": "European Union", "url": "https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32012R1215", "version_or_date": "Original act, 2012-12-12; selected indexed articles reviewed 2026-10-07; current consolidation unverified", "source_type": "legislation", "primary_source": true, "authority_tier": 1, "accessed_at": "2026-10-06T23:05:24Z", "relevance": "Articles 39, 43 and 44 support scoped cross-border enforceability, notification and suspension questions. Indexed official excerpts only; direct browser routes returned errors or challenges. No universal recognition rule." }, { "id": "SRC-002", "title": "Code of Civil Procedure - English translation", "organization": "Federal Ministry of Justice and Federal Office of Justice", "url": "https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/englisch_zpo/englisch_zpo.html", "version_or_date": "Selected indexed sections 704, 705 and 717 reviewed 2026-10-07; translation and consolidation pin unresolved", "source_type": "legislation", "primary_source": true, "authority_tier": 1, "accessed_at": "2026-10-06T23:05:24Z", "relevance": "German example distinguishes finality from provisional enforceability and modification of the enforceable basis. Full browser retrieval failed; not a current German-law certification." }, { "id": "SRC-003", "title": "Civil Procedure Rules Part 85 - Claims on controlled goods and executed goods", "organization": "Ministry of Justice", "url": "https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part-85-claims-on-controlled-goods-and-executed-goods", "version_or_date": "Live page read 2026-10-07; rules 85.4, 85.5 and 85.8; amendment pin pending", "source_type": "legislation", "primary_source": true, "authority_tier": 1, "accessed_at": "2026-10-06T23:05:24Z", "relevance": "England and Wales example of third-party interests and disputed exempt-goods claims. Only policy-level claim and review references are modeled; no numeric deadlines are encoded." }, { "id": "SRC-004", "title": "Taking Control of Goods: National Standards", "organization": "Ministry of Justice", "url": "https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a7d635aed915d269ba8a5a7/taking-control-of-goods-national-standards.pdf", "version_or_date": "6 April 2014; guidance, not a replacement for current law", "source_type": "public-authority", "primary_source": true, "authority_tier": 1, "accessed_at": "2026-10-06T23:05:24Z", "relevance": "Selected paragraphs 11, 19-22, 31, 34-35, 43-45 and 70-78 support authority, financial records, complaints and vulnerability safeguards. Current statutory rules and amendments remain a separate gate." }, { "id": "SRC-005", "title": "Basic Information on Enforcement", "organization": "United States Environmental Protection Agency", "url": "https://www.epa.gov/enforcement/basic-information-enforcement", "version_or_date": "Page last updated 2026-04-10; read 2026-10-07", "source_type": "public-authority", "primary_source": true, "authority_tier": 1, "accessed_at": "2026-10-06T23:05:24Z", "relevance": "Types of Enforcement Actions and Results show broader administrative and judicial usage. Used to challenge title ambiguity and distinguish regulatory proceedings, orders, settlements and their execution, not to expand this root into prosecution or investigation." }, { "id": "SRC-006", "title": "PROV-O: The PROV Ontology", "organization": "World Wide Web Consortium", "url": "https://www.w3.org/TR/prov-o/", "version_or_date": "Recommendation 2013-04-30", "source_type": "ontology", "primary_source": true, "authority_tier": 1, "accessed_at": "2026-10-06T23:05:24Z", "relevance": "Starting-point classes, attribution, derivation and revision support a proposed provenance alignment. Such links do not prove truth, legal authority or admissibility." }, { "id": "SRC-007", "title": "A guide to the data protection principles", "organization": "Information Commissioner Office", "url": "https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/uk-gdpr-guidance-and-resources/data-protection-principles/a-guide-to-the-data-protection-principles/", "version_or_date": "Page records 2026-03-23 update and guidance-under-review warning; read 2026-10-07", "source_type": "public-authority", "primary_source": true, "authority_tier": 1, "accessed_at": "2026-10-06T23:05:24Z", "relevance": "UK general data-protection principles inform proposed minimization, accuracy, access and retention controls. Applicable law-enforcement or other special regimes require separate review; this is not a universal privacy-law mapping." }, { "id": "SRC-008", "title": "Date and Time on the Internet: Timestamps", "organization": "Internet Engineering Task Force", "url": "https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc3339.html", "version_or_date": "RFC 3339, July 2002, section 5.6", "source_type": "standard", "primary_source": true, "authority_tier": 1, "accessed_at": "2026-10-06T23:05:24Z", "relevance": "Timestamp representation with seconds and offsets. Legal calendar, notice effectiveness and local-date rules are outside this syntax standard." } ], "structure": { "bundles": [ { "id": "bundle-foundation", "name": "Identity and mandate", "description": "Establish the tracked subject and qualified basis.", "rationale": "Proposed grouping of action-local assertions supported by the cited examples. The grouping is model design, not a claim that any source mandates this schema.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002", "SRC-004", "SRC-005", "SRC-006" ], "layers": [ { "id": "layer-identity", "name": "Action identity", "description": "One action remains identifiable across attempts, pauses and corrections. Repeated measures and related actions need explicit identity decisions.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-005", "SRC-006" ], "findings": [ { "id": "finding-identity", "name": "Namespace and granularity", "description": "One action remains identifiable across attempts, pauses and corrections. Repeated measures and related actions need explicit identity decisions.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-005", "SRC-006" ], "questions": [ { "id": "finding-identity-q-1", "text": "Which master identifier distinguishes this action from its case and sibling actions?", "kind": "identity", "answer_data": [ "action identifier", "authority namespace", "case reference", "sibling links" ] }, { "id": "finding-identity-q-2", "text": "Which execution-focused action class and jurisdiction profile apply?", "kind": "classification", "answer_data": [ "action class", "profile identifier", "profile version", "unresolved classification" ] }, { "id": "finding-identity-q-3", "text": "When does a repeated or transferred measure retain this action identity or require a successor?", "kind": "relationship", "answer_data": [ "identity policy", "transfer evidence", "successor reference", "reconciliation status" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "finding-identity-data-1", "name": "Namespace and granularity answer group 1", "description": "Candidate fields: action identifier; authority namespace; case reference; sibling links. Preserve unknown and disputed values; nested schema and profile cardinalities require adoption work.", "value_kind": "object", "cardinality": "0..n", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-005", "SRC-006" ] }, { "id": "finding-identity-data-2", "name": "Namespace and granularity answer group 2", "description": "Candidate fields: action class; profile identifier; profile version; unresolved classification. Preserve unknown and disputed values; nested schema and profile cardinalities require adoption work.", "value_kind": "object", "cardinality": "0..n", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-005", "SRC-006" ] }, { "id": "finding-identity-data-3", "name": "Namespace and granularity answer group 3", "description": "Candidate fields: identity policy; transfer evidence; successor reference; reconciliation status. Preserve unknown and disputed values; nested schema and profile cardinalities require adoption work.", "value_kind": "object", "cardinality": "0..n", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-005", "SRC-006" ] } ], "artifacts": [ { "id": "finding-identity-artifact", "name": "Namespace and granularity evidence record", "description": "Versioned local assessment or external record reference supporting this finding. Store only authorized payloads; representation is proposed, not an implemented legal form.", "media_or_form": [ "Structured record with protected evidence references", "Authorized document projection" ], "serial": true, "identity_strategy": "Authoritative master-system identifier and namespace first; governed stable URI second; local opaque UUID with reconciliation state otherwise. Keep immutable revision and supersession references; dates and personal names are not identifiers.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-005", "SRC-006" ] } ], "inline_only_rationale": null } ] }, { "id": "layer-basis", "name": "Authority and enforceability", "description": "Reference the decision or other obligation, competent actor and assessment version. Finality, enforceability and operational assignment are distinct assertions.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002", "SRC-004" ], "findings": [ { "id": "finding-basis", "name": "Qualified legal basis", "description": "Reference the decision or other obligation, competent actor and assessment version. Finality, enforceability and operational assignment are distinct assertions.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002", "SRC-004" ], "questions": [ { "id": "finding-basis-q-1", "text": "Which legal basis and delegation support the responsible actor for this scope and time?", "kind": "authority", "answer_data": [ "basis reference", "issuer", "actor reference", "delegation", "jurisdiction", "validity interval" ] }, { "id": "finding-basis-q-2", "text": "What is the assessed enforceability state, including provisional conditions and unknowns?", "kind": "state", "answer_data": [ "assessment reference", "finality assertion", "enforceability assertion", "conditions", "reviewer", "assessed time" ] }, { "id": "finding-basis-q-3", "text": "Which version of the title or obligation and any superseding instrument support this action?", "kind": "evidence", "answer_data": [ "title or obligation reference", "version", "supersession links", "supporting evidence" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "finding-basis-data-1", "name": "Qualified legal basis answer group 1", "description": "Candidate fields: basis reference; issuer; actor reference; delegation; jurisdiction; validity interval. Preserve unknown and disputed values; nested schema and profile cardinalities require adoption work.", "value_kind": "object", "cardinality": "0..n", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002", "SRC-004" ] }, { "id": "finding-basis-data-2", "name": "Qualified legal basis answer group 2", "description": "Candidate fields: assessment reference; finality assertion; enforceability assertion; conditions; reviewer; assessed time. Preserve unknown and disputed values; nested schema and profile cardinalities require adoption work.", "value_kind": "object", "cardinality": "0..n", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002", "SRC-004" ] }, { "id": "finding-basis-data-3", "name": "Qualified legal basis answer group 3", "description": "Candidate fields: title or obligation reference; version; supersession links; supporting evidence. Preserve unknown and disputed values; nested schema and profile cardinalities require adoption work.", "value_kind": "object", "cardinality": "0..n", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002", "SRC-004" ] } ], "artifacts": [ { "id": "finding-basis-artifact", "name": "Qualified legal basis evidence record", "description": "Versioned local assessment or external record reference supporting this finding. Store only authorized payloads; representation is proposed, not an implemented legal form.", "media_or_form": [ "Structured record with protected evidence references", "Authorized document projection" ], "serial": true, "identity_strategy": "Authoritative master-system identifier and namespace first; governed stable URI second; local opaque UUID with reconciliation state otherwise. Keep immutable revision and supersession references; dates and personal names are not identifiers.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002", "SRC-004" ] } ], "inline_only_rationale": null } ] } ] }, { "id": "bundle-measure", "name": "Scope and safeguards", "description": "Bound the measure and preserve affected interests.", "rationale": "Proposed grouping of action-local assertions supported by the cited examples. The grouping is model design, not a claim that any source mandates this schema.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-003", "SRC-004", "SRC-005" ], "layers": [ { "id": "layer-scope", "name": "Measure scope and subjects", "description": "Define the action-specific obligation and affected subjects by reference. Multiple targets require a separate scope and outcome for each, without assuming ownership from presence.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-003", "SRC-005" ], "findings": [ { "id": "finding-scope", "name": "Bounded measure", "description": "Define the action-specific obligation and affected subjects by reference. Multiple targets require a separate scope and outcome for each, without assuming ownership from presence.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-003", "SRC-005" ], "questions": [ { "id": "finding-scope-q-1", "text": "Which obligation components and target references are included in this measure?", "kind": "composition", "answer_data": [ "component keys", "obligation reference", "party references", "asset or location references", "scope exclusions" ] }, { "id": "finding-scope-q-2", "text": "Which territorial or site limits qualify the recorded measure?", "kind": "spatial", "answer_data": [ "territorial scope", "site reference", "precision", "jurisdiction assessment", "disputed location" ] }, { "id": "finding-scope-q-3", "text": "Which claimant, affected party and third-party interests are asserted without deciding title?", "kind": "ownership", "answer_data": [ "role bindings", "interest claim", "source", "disputed ownership", "representative mandate" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "finding-scope-data-1", "name": "Bounded measure answer group 1", "description": "Candidate fields: component keys; obligation reference; party references; asset or location references; scope exclusions. Preserve unknown and disputed values; nested schema and profile cardinalities require adoption work.", "value_kind": "object", "cardinality": "0..n", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-003", "SRC-005" ] }, { "id": "finding-scope-data-2", "name": "Bounded measure answer group 2", "description": "Candidate fields: territorial scope; site reference; precision; jurisdiction assessment; disputed location. Preserve unknown and disputed values; nested schema and profile cardinalities require adoption work.", "value_kind": "object", "cardinality": "0..n", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-003", "SRC-005" ] }, { "id": "finding-scope-data-3", "name": "Bounded measure answer group 3", "description": "Candidate fields: role bindings; interest claim; source; disputed ownership; representative mandate. Preserve unknown and disputed values; nested schema and profile cardinalities require adoption work.", "value_kind": "object", "cardinality": "0..n", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-003", "SRC-005" ] } ], "artifacts": [ { "id": "finding-scope-artifact", "name": "Bounded measure evidence record", "description": "Versioned local assessment or external record reference supporting this finding. Store only authorized payloads; representation is proposed, not an implemented legal form.", "media_or_form": [ "Structured record with protected evidence references", "Authorized document projection" ], "serial": true, "identity_strategy": "Authoritative master-system identifier and namespace first; governed stable URI second; local opaque UUID with reconciliation state otherwise. Keep immutable revision and supersession references; dates and personal names are not identifiers.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-003", "SRC-005" ] } ], "inline_only_rationale": null } ] }, { "id": "layer-safeguards", "name": "Protection and proportionality", "description": "Keep action-specific protection assessments and unresolved concerns visible. Legal exemptions and vulnerability responses depend on the adopted profile and authorized review.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-003", "SRC-004" ], "findings": [ { "id": "finding-safeguards", "name": "Safeguard assessment", "description": "Keep action-specific protection assessments and unresolved concerns visible. Legal exemptions and vulnerability responses depend on the adopted profile and authorized review.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-003", "SRC-004" ], "questions": [ { "id": "finding-safeguards-q-1", "text": "Which asserted exemptions or protected interests constrain each target?", "kind": "constraint", "answer_data": [ "target key", "protection claim", "applicable provision", "decision reference", "unresolved issue" ] }, { "id": "finding-safeguards-q-2", "text": "What recorded review supports the measure scope and proportionality assessment?", "kind": "decision", "answer_data": [ "review reference", "alternatives considered", "assessed scope", "rationale", "reviewer" ] }, { "id": "finding-safeguards-q-3", "text": "Which vulnerability or safety concern requires restricted handling or human escalation?", "kind": "exception", "answer_data": [ "minimal concern code", "restricted evidence reference", "escalation owner", "assessment status" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "finding-safeguards-data-1", "name": "Safeguard assessment answer group 1", "description": "Candidate fields: target key; protection claim; applicable provision; decision reference; unresolved issue. Preserve unknown and disputed values; nested schema and profile cardinalities require adoption work.", "value_kind": "object", "cardinality": "0..n", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-003", "SRC-004" ] }, { "id": "finding-safeguards-data-2", "name": "Safeguard assessment answer group 2", "description": "Candidate fields: review reference; alternatives considered; assessed scope; rationale; reviewer. Preserve unknown and disputed values; nested schema and profile cardinalities require adoption work.", "value_kind": "object", "cardinality": "0..n", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-003", "SRC-004" ] }, { "id": "finding-safeguards-data-3", "name": "Safeguard assessment answer group 3", "description": "Candidate fields: minimal concern code; restricted evidence reference; escalation owner; assessment status. Preserve unknown and disputed values; nested schema and profile cardinalities require adoption work.", "value_kind": "object", "cardinality": "0..n", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-003", "SRC-004" ] } ], "artifacts": [ { "id": "finding-safeguards-artifact", "name": "Safeguard assessment evidence record", "description": "Versioned local assessment or external record reference supporting this finding. Store only authorized payloads; representation is proposed, not an implemented legal form.", "media_or_form": [ "Structured record with protected evidence references", "Authorized document projection" ], "serial": true, "identity_strategy": "Authoritative master-system identifier and namespace first; governed stable URI second; local opaque UUID with reconciliation state otherwise. Keep immutable revision and supersession references; dates and personal names are not identifiers.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-003", "SRC-004" ] } ], "inline_only_rationale": null } ] } ] }, { "id": "bundle-procedure", "name": "Notice and time", "description": "Record communication and prerequisite evidence.", "rationale": "Proposed grouping of action-local assertions supported by the cited examples. The grouping is model design, not a claim that any source mandates this schema.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002", "SRC-004", "SRC-008" ], "layers": [ { "id": "layer-notice", "name": "Notification and participation", "description": "Separate required communications, observed delivery and assessed legal service. An upload, send event or translated copy does not establish valid service.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-004" ], "findings": [ { "id": "finding-notice", "name": "Communication evidence", "description": "Separate required communications, observed delivery and assessed legal service. An upload, send event or translated copy does not establish valid service.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-004" ], "questions": [ { "id": "finding-notice-q-1", "text": "Which notice, certificate or participation requirement applies and what exception is evidenced?", "kind": "requirement", "answer_data": [ "profile requirement", "recipient role", "required artifact reference", "exception basis", "assessment" ] }, { "id": "finding-notice-q-2", "text": "What delivery, receipt and service assertions are recorded for each intended recipient?", "kind": "event", "answer_data": [ "recipient key", "dispatch event", "receipt evidence", "service assessment", "disputed service" ] }, { "id": "finding-notice-q-3", "text": "Which language, representation or accessible-format needs govern the recipient view?", "kind": "access", "answer_data": [ "language request", "format need", "verified mandate", "permitted view", "response record" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "finding-notice-data-1", "name": "Communication evidence answer group 1", "description": "Candidate fields: profile requirement; recipient role; required artifact reference; exception basis; assessment. Preserve unknown and disputed values; nested schema and profile cardinalities require adoption work.", "value_kind": "object", "cardinality": "0..n", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-004" ] }, { "id": "finding-notice-data-2", "name": "Communication evidence answer group 2", "description": "Candidate fields: recipient key; dispatch event; receipt evidence; service assessment; disputed service. Preserve unknown and disputed values; nested schema and profile cardinalities require adoption work.", "value_kind": "object", "cardinality": "0..n", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-004" ] }, { "id": "finding-notice-data-3", "name": "Communication evidence answer group 3", "description": "Candidate fields: language request; format need; verified mandate; permitted view; response record. Preserve unknown and disputed values; nested schema and profile cardinalities require adoption work.", "value_kind": "object", "cardinality": "0..n", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-004" ] } ], "artifacts": [ { "id": "finding-notice-artifact", "name": "Communication evidence evidence record", "description": "Versioned local assessment or external record reference supporting this finding. Store only authorized payloads; representation is proposed, not an implemented legal form.", "media_or_form": [ "Structured record with protected evidence references", "Authorized document projection" ], "serial": true, "identity_strategy": "Authoritative master-system identifier and namespace first; governed stable URI second; local opaque UUID with reconciliation state otherwise. Keep immutable revision and supersession references; dates and personal names are not identifiers.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-004" ] } ], "inline_only_rationale": null } ] }, { "id": "layer-time", "name": "Time and prerequisite tracking", "description": "Preserve event and record times separately. Applicable calendars, condition precedence and legal time effects require a pinned profile, not generic arithmetic.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002", "SRC-008" ], "findings": [ { "id": "finding-time", "name": "Temporal assertions", "description": "Preserve event and record times separately. Applicable calendars, condition precedence and legal time effects require a pinned profile, not generic arithmetic.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002", "SRC-008" ], "questions": [ { "id": "finding-time-q-1", "text": "Which trigger, calendar and effective interval qualify a claimed deadline or prerequisite?", "kind": "temporal", "answer_data": [ "trigger reference", "date or instant", "timezone", "calendar version", "rule reference", "uncertainty" ] }, { "id": "finding-time-q-2", "text": "Which prerequisites remain unassessed, satisfied, disputed or no longer effective?", "kind": "process", "answer_data": [ "prerequisite key", "assessment status", "source version", "reviewer", "reassessment trigger" ] }, { "id": "finding-time-q-3", "text": "How are conflicting time evidence and missing timezone or precision handled before local status changes?", "kind": "validation", "answer_data": [ "conflicting assertions", "precision", "unresolved offset", "validation result", "escalation" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "finding-time-data-1", "name": "Temporal assertions answer group 1", "description": "Candidate fields: trigger reference; date or instant; timezone; calendar version; rule reference; uncertainty. Preserve unknown and disputed values; nested schema and profile cardinalities require adoption work.", "value_kind": "object", "cardinality": "0..n", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002", "SRC-008" ] }, { "id": "finding-time-data-2", "name": "Temporal assertions answer group 2", "description": "Candidate fields: prerequisite key; assessment status; source version; reviewer; reassessment trigger. Preserve unknown and disputed values; nested schema and profile cardinalities require adoption work.", "value_kind": "object", "cardinality": "0..n", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002", "SRC-008" ] }, { "id": "finding-time-data-3", "name": "Temporal assertions answer group 3", "description": "Candidate fields: conflicting assertions; precision; unresolved offset; validation result; escalation. Preserve unknown and disputed values; nested schema and profile cardinalities require adoption work.", "value_kind": "object", "cardinality": "0..n", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002", "SRC-008" ] } ], "artifacts": [ { "id": "finding-time-artifact", "name": "Temporal assertions evidence record", "description": "Versioned local assessment or external record reference supporting this finding. Store only authorized payloads; representation is proposed, not an implemented legal form.", "media_or_form": [ "Structured record with protected evidence references", "Authorized document projection" ], "serial": true, "identity_strategy": "Authoritative master-system identifier and namespace first; governed stable URI second; local opaque UUID with reconciliation state otherwise. Keep immutable revision and supersession references; dates and personal names are not identifiers.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002", "SRC-008" ] } ], "inline_only_rationale": null } ] } ] }, { "id": "bundle-progress", "name": "Occurrences and results", "description": "Separate observed events and attributed financial evidence.", "rationale": "Proposed grouping of action-local assertions supported by the cited examples. The grouping is model design, not a claim that any source mandates this schema.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-004", "SRC-005", "SRC-006", "SRC-008" ], "layers": [ { "id": "layer-occurrences", "name": "Recorded execution occurrences", "description": "Record attributed assertions about attempts and results at policy level. Planned, attempted and completed events are distinct and may be contradicted by later evidence.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-004", "SRC-006", "SRC-008" ], "findings": [ { "id": "finding-occurrences", "name": "Observed progress", "description": "Record attributed assertions about attempts and results at policy level. Planned, attempted and completed events are distinct and may be contradicted by later evidence.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-004", "SRC-006", "SRC-008" ], "questions": [ { "id": "finding-occurrences-q-1", "text": "Which action occurrence was reported and how is it distinguished from a plan or instruction?", "kind": "event", "answer_data": [ "occurrence identifier", "event class", "reporter", "actual or planned flag", "source reference" ] }, { "id": "finding-occurrences-q-2", "text": "Who observed or reported each result and what transformation produced the local record?", "kind": "provenance", "answer_data": [ "observer", "reporting actor", "source artifact", "derivation", "digest", "confidence" ] }, { "id": "finding-occurrences-q-3", "text": "What uncertainty, failure, partial result or contrary evidence limits the reported outcome?", "kind": "quality", "answer_data": [ "target outcome", "failure category", "disputed assertion", "contrary reference", "human review" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "finding-occurrences-data-1", "name": "Observed progress answer group 1", "description": "Candidate fields: occurrence identifier; event class; reporter; actual or planned flag; source reference. Preserve unknown and disputed values; nested schema and profile cardinalities require adoption work.", "value_kind": "object", "cardinality": "0..n", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-004", "SRC-006", "SRC-008" ] }, { "id": "finding-occurrences-data-2", "name": "Observed progress answer group 2", "description": "Candidate fields: observer; reporting actor; source artifact; derivation; digest; confidence. Preserve unknown and disputed values; nested schema and profile cardinalities require adoption work.", "value_kind": "object", "cardinality": "0..n", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-004", "SRC-006", "SRC-008" ] }, { "id": "finding-occurrences-data-3", "name": "Observed progress answer group 3", "description": "Candidate fields: target outcome; failure category; disputed assertion; contrary reference; human review. Preserve unknown and disputed values; nested schema and profile cardinalities require adoption work.", "value_kind": "object", "cardinality": "0..n", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-004", "SRC-006", "SRC-008" ] } ], "artifacts": [ { "id": "finding-occurrences-artifact", "name": "Observed progress evidence record", "description": "Versioned local assessment or external record reference supporting this finding. Store only authorized payloads; representation is proposed, not an implemented legal form.", "media_or_form": [ "Structured record with protected evidence references", "Authorized document projection" ], "serial": true, "identity_strategy": "Authoritative master-system identifier and namespace first; governed stable URI second; local opaque UUID with reconciliation state otherwise. Keep immutable revision and supersession references; dates and personal names are not identifiers.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-004", "SRC-006", "SRC-008" ] } ], "inline_only_rationale": null } ] }, { "id": "layer-amounts", "name": "Financial outcome references", "description": "Track attributed amounts and external transaction evidence where relevant. Assessment, receipt, allocation and refund are separate; no local field executes payment or proves discharge.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-004", "SRC-005", "SRC-006" ], "findings": [ { "id": "finding-amounts", "name": "Amount reconciliation", "description": "Track attributed amounts and external transaction evidence where relevant. Assessment, receipt, allocation and refund are separate; no local field executes payment or proves discharge.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-004", "SRC-005", "SRC-006" ], "questions": [ { "id": "finding-amounts-q-1", "text": "Which principal, interest, cost or recovery amounts are asserted with currency and valuation time?", "kind": "measurement", "answer_data": [ "amount category", "decimal value", "currency", "effective time", "source", "disputed amount" ] }, { "id": "finding-amounts-q-2", "text": "Which external receipts, allocations or refunds support the amount assertions?", "kind": "relationship", "answer_data": [ "transaction reference", "allocation reference", "reconciliation status", "duplicate detection key" ] }, { "id": "finding-amounts-q-3", "text": "How are partial satisfaction, competing allocations and nonmonetary actions represented without a false zero balance?", "kind": "constraint", "answer_data": [ "satisfaction reference", "allocation conflict", "nonmonetary flag", "unknown balance", "review owner" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "finding-amounts-data-1", "name": "Amount reconciliation answer group 1", "description": "Candidate fields: amount category; decimal value; currency; effective time; source; disputed amount. Preserve unknown and disputed values; nested schema and profile cardinalities require adoption work.", "value_kind": "object", "cardinality": "0..n", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-004", "SRC-005", "SRC-006" ] }, { "id": "finding-amounts-data-2", "name": "Amount reconciliation answer group 2", "description": "Candidate fields: transaction reference; allocation reference; reconciliation status; duplicate detection key. Preserve unknown and disputed values; nested schema and profile cardinalities require adoption work.", "value_kind": "object", "cardinality": "0..n", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-004", "SRC-005", "SRC-006" ] }, { "id": "finding-amounts-data-3", "name": "Amount reconciliation answer group 3", "description": "Candidate fields: satisfaction reference; allocation conflict; nonmonetary flag; unknown balance; review owner. Preserve unknown and disputed values; nested schema and profile cardinalities require adoption work.", "value_kind": "object", "cardinality": "0..n", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-004", "SRC-005", "SRC-006" ] } ], "artifacts": [ { "id": "finding-amounts-artifact", "name": "Amount reconciliation evidence record", "description": "Versioned local assessment or external record reference supporting this finding. Store only authorized payloads; representation is proposed, not an implemented legal form.", "media_or_form": [ "Structured record with protected evidence references", "Authorized document projection" ], "serial": true, "identity_strategy": "Authoritative master-system identifier and namespace first; governed stable URI second; local opaque UUID with reconciliation state otherwise. Keep immutable revision and supersession references; dates and personal names are not identifiers.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-004", "SRC-005", "SRC-006" ] } ], "inline_only_rationale": null } ] } ] }, { "id": "bundle-remedies", "name": "Review and closure", "description": "Track external review effects and qualified outcomes.", "rationale": "Proposed grouping of action-local assertions supported by the cited examples. The grouping is model design, not a claim that any source mandates this schema.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002", "SRC-003", "SRC-004", "SRC-005" ], "layers": [ { "id": "layer-review", "name": "Challenge and suspension", "description": "Link complaints, objections and review proceedings without mastering them. Filing a challenge, requesting a stay and an effective suspension are different states.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002", "SRC-003", "SRC-004" ], "findings": [ { "id": "finding-review", "name": "Review-effect references", "description": "Link complaints, objections and review proceedings without mastering them. Filing a challenge, requesting a stay and an effective suspension are different states.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002", "SRC-003", "SRC-004" ], "questions": [ { "id": "finding-review-q-1", "text": "Which challenge or complaint concerns this action and which external proceeding owns it?", "kind": "relationship", "answer_data": [ "challenge reference", "issue scope", "filing evidence", "proceeding master", "standing assessment" ] }, { "id": "finding-review-q-2", "text": "What evidenced stay, limitation or lifting decision affects which action components?", "kind": "state", "answer_data": [ "decision reference", "affected components", "asserted effect", "effective interval", "conditions", "uncertainty" ] }, { "id": "finding-review-q-3", "text": "Who assessed the effect of a new review decision and authorized recording its local consequence?", "kind": "authority", "answer_data": [ "reviewer", "delegated authority", "source version", "expected revision", "recorded consequence" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "finding-review-data-1", "name": "Review-effect references answer group 1", "description": "Candidate fields: challenge reference; issue scope; filing evidence; proceeding master; standing assessment. Preserve unknown and disputed values; nested schema and profile cardinalities require adoption work.", "value_kind": "object", "cardinality": "0..n", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002", "SRC-003", "SRC-004" ] }, { "id": "finding-review-data-2", "name": "Review-effect references answer group 2", "description": "Candidate fields: decision reference; affected components; asserted effect; effective interval; conditions; uncertainty. Preserve unknown and disputed values; nested schema and profile cardinalities require adoption work.", "value_kind": "object", "cardinality": "0..n", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002", "SRC-003", "SRC-004" ] }, { "id": "finding-review-data-3", "name": "Review-effect references answer group 3", "description": "Candidate fields: reviewer; delegated authority; source version; expected revision; recorded consequence. Preserve unknown and disputed values; nested schema and profile cardinalities require adoption work.", "value_kind": "object", "cardinality": "0..n", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002", "SRC-003", "SRC-004" ] } ], "artifacts": [ { "id": "finding-review-artifact", "name": "Review-effect references evidence record", "description": "Versioned local assessment or external record reference supporting this finding. Store only authorized payloads; representation is proposed, not an implemented legal form.", "media_or_form": [ "Structured record with protected evidence references", "Authorized document projection" ], "serial": true, "identity_strategy": "Authoritative master-system identifier and namespace first; governed stable URI second; local opaque UUID with reconciliation state otherwise. Keep immutable revision and supersession references; dates and personal names are not identifiers.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002", "SRC-003", "SRC-004" ] } ], "inline_only_rationale": null } ] }, { "id": "layer-closure", "name": "Closure and continuing obligations", "description": "Local closure requires an attributed reason and residual-obligation check. Completion, withdrawal, unsuccessful return and legal discharge are distinct; correction or reversal can remain relevant.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-004", "SRC-005" ], "findings": [ { "id": "finding-closure", "name": "Outcome qualification", "description": "Local closure requires an attributed reason and residual-obligation check. Completion, withdrawal, unsuccessful return and legal discharge are distinct; correction or reversal can remain relevant.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-004", "SRC-005" ], "questions": [ { "id": "finding-closure-q-1", "text": "Which closure reason and supporting assessment apply to the whole action or only part of it?", "kind": "lifecycle", "answer_data": [ "closure category", "component scope", "assessment reference", "authorizer", "effective time" ] }, { "id": "finding-closure-q-2", "text": "What evidence supports fulfillment or discharge and which residual duties remain unresolved?", "kind": "evidence", "answer_data": [ "fulfillment assertion", "discharge assessment", "residual obligation references", "responsible party" ] }, { "id": "finding-closure-q-3", "text": "What later correction, reversal or reopening reference changes the recorded closure interpretation?", "kind": "exception", "answer_data": [ "later instrument", "superseded assertion", "successor or reopened action", "restitution reference", "reviewer" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "finding-closure-data-1", "name": "Outcome qualification answer group 1", "description": "Candidate fields: closure category; component scope; assessment reference; authorizer; effective time. Preserve unknown and disputed values; nested schema and profile cardinalities require adoption work.", "value_kind": "object", "cardinality": "0..n", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-004", "SRC-005" ] }, { "id": "finding-closure-data-2", "name": "Outcome qualification answer group 2", "description": "Candidate fields: fulfillment assertion; discharge assessment; residual obligation references; responsible party. Preserve unknown and disputed values; nested schema and profile cardinalities require adoption work.", "value_kind": "object", "cardinality": "0..n", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-004", "SRC-005" ] }, { "id": "finding-closure-data-3", "name": "Outcome qualification answer group 3", "description": "Candidate fields: later instrument; superseded assertion; successor or reopened action; restitution reference; reviewer. Preserve unknown and disputed values; nested schema and profile cardinalities require adoption work.", "value_kind": "object", "cardinality": "0..n", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-004", "SRC-005" ] } ], "artifacts": [ { "id": "finding-closure-artifact", "name": "Outcome qualification evidence record", "description": "Versioned local assessment or external record reference supporting this finding. Store only authorized payloads; representation is proposed, not an implemented legal form.", "media_or_form": [ "Structured record with protected evidence references", "Authorized document projection" ], "serial": true, "identity_strategy": "Authoritative master-system identifier and namespace first; governed stable URI second; local opaque UUID with reconciliation state otherwise. Keep immutable revision and supersession references; dates and personal names are not identifiers.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-004", "SRC-005" ] } ], "inline_only_rationale": null } ] } ] }, { "id": "bundle-stewardship", "name": "Records and integration", "description": "Control disclosure, disposition and exchange fidelity.", "rationale": "Proposed grouping of action-local assertions supported by the cited examples. The grouping is model design, not a claim that any source mandates this schema.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-006", "SRC-007", "SRC-008" ], "layers": [ { "id": "layer-records", "name": "Restricted record continuity", "description": "Govern action records and copies by purpose, recipient and retention profile. Public metadata never implies public access to personal or protected payloads.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-006", "SRC-007" ], "findings": [ { "id": "finding-records", "name": "Access and disposition", "description": "Govern action records and copies by purpose, recipient and retention profile. Public metadata never implies public access to personal or protected payloads.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-006", "SRC-007" ], "questions": [ { "id": "finding-records-q-1", "text": "Which minimal information is necessary for the action purpose and which payloads need restricted views?", "kind": "privacy", "answer_data": [ "purpose", "data category", "necessity assessment", "restricted payload reference", "redaction rule" ] }, { "id": "finding-records-q-2", "text": "Which retention schedule, legal hold and lawful disposal instruction govern each local payload and copy?", "kind": "retention", "answer_data": [ "schedule version", "hold scope", "review date", "disposal authority", "tombstone policy" ] }, { "id": "finding-records-q-3", "text": "Which recipient can inspect or export each action segment and how is the decision audited?", "kind": "access", "answer_data": [ "role", "purpose", "segment scope", "disclosure basis", "access decision", "audit reference" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "finding-records-data-1", "name": "Access and disposition answer group 1", "description": "Candidate fields: purpose; data category; necessity assessment; restricted payload reference; redaction rule. Preserve unknown and disputed values; nested schema and profile cardinalities require adoption work.", "value_kind": "object", "cardinality": "0..n", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-006", "SRC-007" ] }, { "id": "finding-records-data-2", "name": "Access and disposition answer group 2", "description": "Candidate fields: schedule version; hold scope; review date; disposal authority; tombstone policy. Preserve unknown and disputed values; nested schema and profile cardinalities require adoption work.", "value_kind": "object", "cardinality": "0..n", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-006", "SRC-007" ] }, { "id": "finding-records-data-3", "name": "Access and disposition answer group 3", "description": "Candidate fields: role; purpose; segment scope; disclosure basis; access decision; audit reference. Preserve unknown and disputed values; nested schema and profile cardinalities require adoption work.", "value_kind": "object", "cardinality": "0..n", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-006", "SRC-007" ] } ], "artifacts": [ { "id": "finding-records-artifact", "name": "Access and disposition evidence record", "description": "Versioned local assessment or external record reference supporting this finding. Store only authorized payloads; representation is proposed, not an implemented legal form.", "media_or_form": [ "Structured record with protected evidence references", "Authorized document projection" ], "serial": true, "identity_strategy": "Authoritative master-system identifier and namespace first; governed stable URI second; local opaque UUID with reconciliation state otherwise. Keep immutable revision and supersession references; dates and personal names are not identifiers.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-006", "SRC-007" ] } ], "inline_only_rationale": null } ] }, { "id": "layer-exchange", "name": "Reference and exchange integrity", "description": "Format-neutral links preserve authority namespaces and assertion qualifiers. External vocabularies are alignments; executable mappings and nested schemas are deferred.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-006", "SRC-008" ], "findings": [ { "id": "finding-exchange", "name": "Profile mapping", "description": "Format-neutral links preserve authority namespaces and assertion qualifiers. External vocabularies are alignments; executable mappings and nested schemas are deferred.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-006", "SRC-008" ], "questions": [ { "id": "finding-exchange-q-1", "text": "Which pinned mappings preserve action identity and source assertion qualifiers across systems?", "kind": "interoperability", "answer_data": [ "mapping version", "source namespace", "target namespace", "loss report", "validation result" ] }, { "id": "finding-exchange-q-2", "text": "How does an imported revision remain traceable without replacing a judgment or evidence master?", "kind": "provenance", "answer_data": [ "source revision", "derivation link", "import time", "digest", "authority boundary" ] }, { "id": "finding-exchange-q-3", "text": "Which unresolved reference or lost legal qualifier prevents accepting an exchange as equivalent?", "kind": "validation", "answer_data": [ "unresolved identifier", "omitted qualifier", "compatibility rule", "rejection reason", "correction route" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "finding-exchange-data-1", "name": "Profile mapping answer group 1", "description": "Candidate fields: mapping version; source namespace; target namespace; loss report; validation result. Preserve unknown and disputed values; nested schema and profile cardinalities require adoption work.", "value_kind": "object", "cardinality": "0..n", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-006", "SRC-008" ] }, { "id": "finding-exchange-data-2", "name": "Profile mapping answer group 2", "description": "Candidate fields: source revision; derivation link; import time; digest; authority boundary. Preserve unknown and disputed values; nested schema and profile cardinalities require adoption work.", "value_kind": "object", "cardinality": "0..n", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-006", "SRC-008" ] }, { "id": "finding-exchange-data-3", "name": "Profile mapping answer group 3", "description": "Candidate fields: unresolved identifier; omitted qualifier; compatibility rule; rejection reason; correction route. Preserve unknown and disputed values; nested schema and profile cardinalities require adoption work.", "value_kind": "object", "cardinality": "0..n", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-006", "SRC-008" ] } ], "artifacts": [ { "id": "finding-exchange-artifact", "name": "Profile mapping evidence record", "description": "Versioned local assessment or external record reference supporting this finding. Store only authorized payloads; representation is proposed, not an implemented legal form.", "media_or_form": [ "Structured record with protected evidence references", "Authorized document projection" ], "serial": true, "identity_strategy": "Authoritative master-system identifier and namespace first; governed stable URI second; local opaque UUID with reconciliation state otherwise. Keep immutable revision and supersession references; dates and personal names are not identifiers.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-006", "SRC-008" ] } ], "inline_only_rationale": null } ] } ] } ] }, "functions": [ { "id": "function-register-action", "name": "Register an action record", "description": "Proposed, unimplemented local operation. Create an action-local identity and unresolved basis assessment.", "inputs": [ "Authority namespace", "External case and basis references", "Custodian and scope" ], "outputs": [ "Action identifier", "Initial revision", "Unresolved prerequisite list", "Refusal or unresolved result with reason" ], "preconditions": [ "Authenticate actor, purpose and action-specific role; infrastructure ownership grants no legal authority.", "Require provenance, authorized payload scope, idempotency key and expected revision for mutations.", "Refuse mutation on missing authority, incompatible profile or conflicting revision; unresolved legal facts remain explicit." ], "effects": [ "Create a local record only; never initiate legal enforcement." ], "source_refs": [ "SRC-005", "SRC-006" ] }, { "id": "function-assess-readiness", "name": "Record prerequisite review", "description": "Proposed, unimplemented local operation. Store an authorized assessment of documentary completeness and unresolved safeguards.", "inputs": [ "Expected revision", "Pinned profile", "Evidence and reviewer assessment" ], "outputs": [ "Recorded review", "Missing or disputed prerequisites", "Refusal or unresolved result with reason" ], "preconditions": [ "Authenticate actor, purpose and action-specific role; infrastructure ownership grants no legal authority.", "Require provenance, authorized payload scope, idempotency key and expected revision for mutations.", "Refuse mutation on missing authority, incompatible profile or conflicting revision; unresolved legal facts remain explicit." ], "effects": [ "Record the assessment without declaring legal permission, enforceability or a safe operational plan." ], "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002", "SRC-003", "SRC-004" ] }, { "id": "function-append-occurrence", "name": "Append an occurrence assertion", "description": "Proposed, unimplemented local operation. Record attributed planned or observed events and contrary evidence.", "inputs": [ "Expected revision", "Occurrence key", "Reporter and evidence", "Event and ingestion times" ], "outputs": [ "New record revision", "Assertion provenance", "Refusal or unresolved result with reason" ], "preconditions": [ "Authenticate actor, purpose and action-specific role; infrastructure ownership grants no legal authority.", "Require provenance, authorized payload scope, idempotency key and expected revision for mutations.", "Refuse mutation on missing authority, incompatible profile or conflicting revision; unresolved legal facts remain explicit." ], "effects": [ "Append local evidence; no dispatch, notice service or physical action occurs." ], "source_refs": [ "SRC-006", "SRC-008" ] }, { "id": "function-record-review-effect", "name": "Record a review-effect reference", "description": "Proposed, unimplemented local operation. Link a stay, modification or lifting decision and its human-assessed action scope.", "inputs": [ "Expected revision", "Decision reference and version", "Authorized assessment", "Affected components" ], "outputs": [ "Qualified local status assertion", "Reassessment flags", "Refusal or unresolved result with reason" ], "preconditions": [ "Authenticate actor, purpose and action-specific role; infrastructure ownership grants no legal authority.", "Require provenance, authorized payload scope, idempotency key and expected revision for mutations.", "Refuse mutation on missing authority, incompatible profile or conflicting revision; unresolved legal facts remain explicit." ], "effects": [ "Record scope and uncertainty; never grant a stay, lift a restriction or decide an appeal." ], "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002", "SRC-003" ] }, { "id": "function-reconcile-outcome", "name": "Reconcile outcome references", "description": "Proposed, unimplemented local operation. Compare external satisfaction and transaction references for the recorded action.", "inputs": [ "Expected revision", "Outcome evidence", "Transaction references where applicable", "Residual-obligation assessment" ], "outputs": [ "Reconciliation report", "Proposed closure state or unresolved discrepancies", "Refusal or unresolved result with reason" ], "preconditions": [ "Authenticate actor, purpose and action-specific role; infrastructure ownership grants no legal authority.", "Require provenance, authorized payload scope, idempotency key and expected revision for mutations.", "Refuse mutation on missing authority, incompatible profile or conflicting revision; unresolved legal facts remain explicit." ], "effects": [ "Record reviewed outcome evidence; no payment, discharge, title transfer or legal termination occurs." ], "source_refs": [ "SRC-004", "SRC-005", "SRC-006" ] }, { "id": "function-export-view", "name": "Prepare an authorized view", "description": "Proposed, unimplemented local operation. Produce a minimized local projection preserving protected-source and review qualifiers.", "inputs": [ "Recipient and purpose", "Permitted scope", "Current revision", "Pinned mapping" ], "outputs": [ "Authorized redacted projection", "Loss report", "Access audit reference", "Refusal or unresolved result with reason" ], "preconditions": [ "Authenticate actor, purpose and action-specific role; infrastructure ownership grants no legal authority.", "Require provenance, authorized payload scope, idempotency key and expected revision for mutations.", "Refuse mutation on missing authority, incompatible profile or conflicting revision; unresolved legal facts remain explicit." ], "effects": [ "Prepare the local view only; external transmission requires separate authority and is not performed here." ], "source_refs": [ "SRC-006", "SRC-007" ] } ], "composition": [ { "target": "WM-POL-021", "relation": "REFERENCE", "purpose": "Optional reciprocal title or decision reference corresponding to the incoming ledger edge. Preserve decision master, version, scope and assessed effect; parent_ids does not imply EXTEND.", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002" ] }, { "target": "WM-POL-017", "relation": "REFERENCE", "purpose": "Optional administrative case context; do not duplicate case workflow or require every judicial action to have an administrative case.", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-005" ] }, { "target": "WM-POL-020", "relation": "REFERENCE", "purpose": "Evidence masters and authorized views remain external; the action keeps only attributed assertion links.", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-006" ] }, { "target": "https://www.w3.org/ns/prov#", "relation": "ALIGN", "purpose": "Conceptual attribution, activity and revision alignment only. An action entity is not thereby identical to a PROV activity; pin mappings before exchange.", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-006" ] } ], "serviceLayers": { "dimension": { "owner_package_requirements": [ "Identify the competent legal authority and record custodian by role and evidence; no commercial owner assignment.", "Pin jurisdiction, sector, enforceability, service, review and retention profiles before operational interpretation.", "Provide namespace, accountable reviewers, master bindings, data classification and escalation routes." ], "namespace_guidance": "Authority-qualified opaque action identifiers distinguish case, action and occurrence. Aliases require evidenced reconciliation; names, addresses and dates never suffice.", "registry_links": [ "vr.wm-pol-023", "Candidate neighbor bindings require version and direction review." ] }, "canon_and_patch": { "canonicalization_rules": [ "Preserve source assertions, uncertainty and legal-profile scope; do not infer guilt, ownership or legal effect from record status.", "Action-class codes are profile values, not a universal list of enforcement powers." ], "patch_rules": [ "Append actor, purpose, expected revision, source version and idempotency key to local changes; retain correction and supersession links.", "Audit continuity permits lawful payload restriction and erasure; do not retain personal content indefinitely merely to preserve history." ], "compatibility_rules": [ "Reject exchange equivalence when a mapping drops a stay, scope, provisional condition, dispute or access restriction." ] }, "artifact_rules": { "identity_priority": [ "Authoritative master-system identifier with namespace and revision", "Governed stable global identifier or IRI with version", "Local opaque UUID assigned by the adopting Dimension with reconciliation status" ], "timestamp_rule": "Recording instants use RFC 3339 with seconds and an explicit UTC offset or Z. Keep event time, observed time, ingestion time and asserted legal effective time distinct. Preserve date-only values, precision, unknown offsets and jurisdictional calendar references without inventing midnight instants.", "serial_naming_rule": "Opaque action key plus artifact category and immutable revision or sequence; no personal names or dates as identity.", "integrity_rule": "Record digest, algorithm, source and transformation where available. A matching digest establishes byte continuity, not truth, authority, admissibility or legal service." }, "policies": [ "Reviewable draft under the owner-authorized single-provider waiver; separate local self-audit is not independent external review.", "Dangerous subjects remain policy-level references. No function orders, schedules or carries out physical enforcement, detention or controlled-item handling.", "Competent human legal assessment and a current profile govern action interpretation; this model is not an enforcement engine.", "Purpose limitation, recipient scope and minimum necessary payload apply to evidence and audit records." ], "crud": { "read": [ "Authenticate recipient, purpose and scope; return only authorized segments with redaction and uncertainty qualifiers." ], "create": [ "Require opaque action identity, custodian and declared scope; unresolved prerequisites must be represented rather than treated as approval." ], "update": [ "Record evidenced local changes with concurrency and idempotency checks; corrections preserve attribution and unresolved disagreement." ], "delete": [ "The adopting Dimension records authority owns lawful disposition under a versioned retention schedule and scoped legal holds; erase or restrict eligible payloads and copies with a minimal non-identifying tombstone where lawful.", "Local deletion does not cancel an enforcement action, annul a title, discharge an obligation or delete referenced master records." ] }, "roles": [ { "name": "Action custodian", "responsibilities": [ "Maintain action identity, master references and accountable record continuity." ] }, { "name": "Authorized recording officer", "responsibilities": [ "Record attributed action facts within delegation without issuing legal instructions." ] }, { "name": "Legal reviewer", "responsibilities": [ "Assess applicability, enforceability, safeguards, service and review effects." ] }, { "name": "Access and records officer", "responsibilities": [ "Approve recipient scope, redaction, retention and disposition." ] }, { "name": "Affected party or representative", "responsibilities": [ "Supply evidence and access only views allowed by verified standing or mandate." ] } ], "access": { "default_rule": "Deny protected action-content access unless role, purpose, subject scope and legal disclosure basis are established.", "scopes": [ "bundle", "layer", "finding", "artifact" ], "exceptions": [ "Statutory disclosure or urgent access requires an explicit basis, accountable actor, minimal scope and subsequent review; no general emergency bypass.", "Public catalogue metadata does not make underlying action files public." ], "audit_requirements": [ "Log authorized reads, exports, corrections and disposal with actor, purpose, scope, revision and outcome; keep personal audit payload only for the lawful period." ] }, "agents_bootstrap": { "filename": "AGENTS.md", "required_fields": [ "Name", "Type", "Specification URL", "Storage type URL", "Interface URL", "Processes URL" ], "read_order": [ "AGENTS.md and adopting authority/access policies", "spec.yaml including all research holds", "Pinned legal profile and authorized master records before action interpretation" ] } }, "coverage": { "claim": "Source-grounded proposed structure for one persistent enforcement-action record, preserving the registry execution boundary and selected regional examples. A separate frozen local no-tools self-audit found no critical conflicts. Independent review, current source verification, legal-profile applicability and executable conformance remain holds; this is a noncanonical reviewable draft.", "confidence": "medium", "checklist": [ { "dimension": "identity", "status": "covered", "notes": "Action identity remains distinct from case, title and execution occurrence." }, { "dimension": "lifecycle", "status": "covered", "notes": "Attempted, paused, partial, closed and corrected assertions do not define legal effects automatically." }, { "dimension": "relationships", "status": "covered", "notes": "Incoming judgment reference preserved; decision, case, evidence and financial masters remain external." }, { "dimension": "temporal", "status": "covered", "notes": "Event, observation, ingestion and asserted effective times preserve precision and unresolved calendar rules." }, { "dimension": "provenance", "status": "covered", "notes": "Attribution, revision and contrary evidence accompany assertions." }, { "dimension": "ownership", "status": "covered", "notes": "Competent authority and custodians are role-based; affected ownership interests remain claims." }, { "dimension": "validation", "status": "gap", "notes": "Research gates are structural; nested instance schemas and legal applicability checks are not implemented." }, { "dimension": "access", "status": "covered", "notes": "Recipient-specific views, protected payloads and disclosure decisions are explicit." }, { "dimension": "retention and deletion", "status": "covered", "notes": "Retention, legal holds, authorized payload disposal and minimal tombstones preserve qualified continuity." }, { "dimension": "interoperability", "status": "gap", "notes": "Conceptual reference and provenance alignment only; executable mappings and pinned neighbors remain pending." }, { "dimension": "direct properties", "status": "covered", "notes": "Class, scope, state, time and attributed amounts are nonphysical properties; physical characteristics belong to target masters." }, { "dimension": "recognition and observation", "status": "covered", "notes": "Document context and attributed occurrence evidence distinguish action from title, allegation and proceeding." }, { "dimension": "capabilities and hazards", "status": "covered", "notes": "Six local proposed functions include preconditions and refusal; wrong subjects, stale stays, disclosure and false satisfaction are hazards." }, { "dimension": "context and evidence", "status": "covered", "notes": "Jurisdiction, profile, actor, source version and uncertainty accompany interpretation." } ], "known_omissions": [ "Independent external review absent under the single-provider waiver.", "Live source status, full legal-text retrieval, current consolidation, translation and jurisdiction applicability remain unverified.", "Nested schemas, controlled action-class codes, executable calendars, financial reconciliation and adversarial instance fixtures are not implemented.", "Administrative, tax, insolvency, family, cross-border and other sector-specific conditions require separate qualified profile research; physical enforcement and detention procedures are excluded.", "Pinned neighbor bindings, privacy-regime selection and executable PROV mappings require implementation review." ], "conflicts": [], "regional_assumptions": [ "EU civil and commercial recognition examples do not apply universally or to all administrative and criminal matters.", "German translated law and England and Wales rules are selected examples, not certified current law for Cyprus or any adopting jurisdiction.", "The United States source documents broader enforcement terminology but does not authorize widening this execution-focused root.", "UK general privacy guidance is explicitly under review and does not establish the correct regime for every enforcement authority." ], "adversarial_checks": [ "Reject finality as a universal prerequisite; distinguish provisional enforceability and unresolved authority.", "Reject mandatory judgment inheritance or treating case identifiers as unique action identifiers.", "Reject challenge filing as automatic suspension and local closure as proof of discharge.", "Reject third-party ownership inference, automatic vulnerability decisions and disclosure from public metadata.", "Reject any local operation that orders or performs a legal or physical enforcement measure." ] }, "researchAdjudication": { "providerMode": "single-provider-waiver", "activeProviders": [ "codex" ], "waivedProviders": [ "claude", "grok" ], "providerPolicy": { "contract_version": "1.0.0", "mode": "single-provider-waiver", "effective_at": "2026-09-06T00:00:00Z", "scope": "Canonical single-stream subject-model research after the six-workstream consolidation", "active_providers": [ "codex" ], "waived_providers": [ { "provider": "claude", "authorized_by": "repository owner", "authorized_at": "2026-09-06T00:00:00Z", "reason": "Claude produced no result on prior 1800-second and 900-second attempts and again timed out on bounded 600-second Sonnet and 300-second Haiku passes. The owner prioritized completion over provider availability." }, { "provider": "grok", "authorized_by": "repository owner", "authorized_at": "2026-09-06T00:00:00Z", "reason": "The repository owner authorized completion without Grok when Grok is unavailable, slow or schema-invalid. Grok may still be attempted as a bounded supplemental reviewer, but its failure never blocks a valid Claude plus no-tools result." } ], "review_rule": "Codex may complete source-grounded fallback research after bounded Claude and Grok attempts fail. It requires a separate no-tools adversarial audit and remains reviewable-draft with a visible absence-of-external-review hold.", "supplemental_provider_attempts": [ { "provider": "claude", "required": false, "maximum_attempts": 1, "failure_policy": "record-and-continue", "admission_rule": "Use only a locally schema-valid result whose sources and boundaries survive adjudication." }, { "provider": "grok", "required": false, "maximum_attempts": 1, "failure_policy": "record-and-continue", "admission_rule": "Use only a locally schema-valid result whose sources and boundaries survive adjudication." } ] }, "boundaryDecision": { "entry_kind": "entity", "status": "accepted", "rationale": "Stable action identity persists across occurrences, review effects and revisions. The root is neither an instantaneous event nor the whole case or judgment. Registry standalone-mm classifies the record plane; the incoming judgment REFERENCE does not establish inheritance or mandatory title containment." }, "decisions": [ { "concept": "Persistent action identity", "disposition": "accepted", "rationale": "The identity finding separates authority-qualified action identity, case identity, occurrences and successors. This supports entity rather than event or procedure-template classification." }, { "concept": "Judgment inheritance", "disposition": "rejected", "rationale": "The frozen ledger supplies an incoming REFERENCE. The candidate parent label alone does not require EXTEND; decision issuance, merits and lifecycle remain externally mastered." }, { "concept": "Mandatory final judgment", "disposition": "rejected", "rationale": "The admitted evidence distinguishes finality and provisional enforceability. Questions request an evidenced basis and conditions without assuming every action follows a final court judgment." }, { "concept": "Unresolved authority and record creation", "disposition": "qualified", "rationale": "An incomplete action record can exist for assessment. Its creation or documentary readiness review grants no power to execute, and missing authority must remain explicit." }, { "concept": "Broad regulatory enforcement terminology", "disposition": "bounded", "rationale": "The United States source is a terminology counterexample. The result preserves the registry execution focus and references broader proceedings instead of absorbing investigation, prosecution or order issuance." }, { "concept": "Targets and protected interests", "disposition": "accepted with profile dependency", "rationale": "Party roles and third-party ownership remain attributed claims. Exemptions, vulnerability and proportionality are reviewed assertions; no automatic target selection or universal protection rule is proposed." }, { "concept": "Notice and time effects", "disposition": "separated", "rationale": "Dispatch, receipt, service and effective time are distinct. Date precision, unknown offsets and profile calendars are retained without encoding a universal notice period or deadline." }, { "concept": "Occurrence and financial evidence", "disposition": "accepted as assertions", "rationale": "Planned and observed events are separated. External receipts and allocations support attributed amounts, not automatic satisfaction, legal discharge or payment execution." }, { "concept": "Challenge, stay and closure", "disposition": "separated", "rationale": "Filing, requesting suspension, effective review decisions and local status recording remain distinct. Partial closure and residual duties prevent successful record processing from becoming proof of fulfillment." }, { "concept": "Local functions and dangerous subjects", "disposition": "accepted as proposed only", "rationale": "All six functions have local effects and explicit refusal conditions. None orders, schedules or performs legal or physical enforcement; dangerous subjects remain policy-level references." }, { "concept": "Access and retention", "disposition": "accepted with regime hold", "rationale": "Scoped views and lawful disposition qualify revision history. Audit continuity cannot require perpetual personal-data retention, and general privacy guidance does not settle every authority's applicable regime." }, { "concept": "Properties and external masters", "disposition": "qualified", "rationale": "The action has class, state, scope, time and attributed amounts. Physical properties and ownership masters belong to targets; the supplement's blanket no-properties claim is not admitted." }, { "concept": "Source assurance and provider attribution", "disposition": "limited and held", "rationale": "Six readable documents and two selected indexed legal excerpts support bounded questions. No direct HTTP status or current-law completeness is claimed, and skipped providers cannot be credited with agreement or independent review." }, { "concept": "Executable instance conformance", "disposition": "deferred", "rationale": "Optional candidate answer groups, conceptual mappings and local function descriptions are research proposals. Nested schemas, creation revision semantics, pinned profiles and adversarial fixtures remain incomplete." } ], "publicationHolds": [ "Independent external review is absent under the owner-authorized single-provider waiver. Claude and Grok were skipped with zero attempts; the separate local Codex no-tools self-audit is not independent second-provider review.", "Live source and version verification is incomplete. Direct HTTP was not attempted under the owner-reported sandbox block; no response status was measured. Six source documents were browser-readable and two legal texts had selected official indexed evidence only. Full text, current consolidation and translation pins remain unresolved; the coordinator checker is prepared.", "Jurisdiction, sector, legal applicability, competence, enforceability, protection, service, review effects, retention and privacy-regime selection require qualified profile review before operational use. The privacy guidance is under review and historical enforcement guidance is not current-law certification.", "Nested instance schemas, action-class codes, pinned neighbor bindings, temporal and financial rules, executable mappings and adversarial fixtures remain incomplete. Proposed functions are not implemented and no runtime or legal-compliance certification is claimed.", "Independent external review was explicitly waived by the repository owner; this codex-only result remains a reviewable draft." ], "deferredResearch": [ "Verify full authoritative legal texts, current versions, translations and applicability for each jurisdiction and sector, including special privacy regimes and exceptions.", "Develop nested schemas and test profiles covering provisional titles, disputed identity, third-party claims, uncertain service, partial stays, direct payments, unsuccessful closure, reversal and lawful disposal.", "Restore independent external review and resolve all publication holds before any canonical or publishable-draft promotion." ] }, "statistics": { "sources": 8, "bundles": 6, "layers": 12, "findings": 12, "questions": 36, "artifacts": 12, "functions": 6 } }