Trust, governance and limitations

Trust requires more than a provenance label. This category explains how the draft models claims, evidence, verification and assurance; how it annotates personal-data concerns; and where its limitations, consumer traps, by-design gaps and unresolved validator caveats are recorded rather than hidden.

schema-derived draft with explicit limitations

This semantic corpus is not an approved SPDTF ontology, a runtime authorisation system, a legal compliance decision or proof that source data is true. Its governance annotations and deterministic checks have only the authority and scope stated on their pages. Read the known-issues register before relying on the model.

Keep four concerns separate

Concern	What the corpus records	What remains outside it
Claim provenance	PROV-O derivation, verification activities, evidence roles and assurance-related concepts.	Whether a claim is factually true in a particular transaction.
Sensitivity	DPV references and PII-bearing annotations kept outside the class and shapes graphs.	Runtime access control, consent operations and organisation-specific legal assessment.
Governance	Recorded modelling decisions, separation rules and page-level status.	Approval of SPDTF meaning or promotion to a governed release.
Limitations	Dated caveats, thin profiles, inference traps, validator settings and re-open triggers.	A guarantee that no unrecorded defect or consumer-specific risk exists.

Review trust and limitations

Provenance and assurance

Claims and evidence model

Inspect PROV-O-backed claims and their three separate truth-makers: derivation, signature and assurance, including evidence roles and verification activities (ODR-0009).

Open page Sensitivity annotations

Governance and PII model

Review DPV references, PII-bearing kinds and the three-graph boundary that keeps advice separate from semantics and constraints.

Open page Required reading

Limitations and known issues

Read the dated, machine-cross-referenced register of consumer traps and caveats—including the EPC cross-trip, thin profiles and ruleset rename—recorded as by-design gaps or limitations rather than hidden model defects.

Open page

Semantic governance is not programme governance

The ontology pages describe governance concepts and the decisions that shaped this corpus. Cross-programme decision rights, lifecycle and promotion rules belong in the site’s Governance destination. For the audit trail connecting individual modelling choices to records, use Lineage, provenance and verification.