Property Pack definition and 451-item scope
A first-principles model of exactly 451 required source data points as 159 candidate ontology resources across bounded contexts and a deliberately small common boundary. The source rows are evidence to model—not 451 pre-decided RDF properties.
Every item has a machine-proposed semantic home, role, disposition and trace to one or more model constructs. These are reviewable hypotheses, not settled meaning. Working groups must challenge the definitions and context ownership; the Interoperability Working Group must review common-boundary terms and mappings. This candidate does not replace the current published ontology.
Semantic homes
Each candidate resource has one owner. The common boundary is exceptional: it carries only meaning genuinely shared across domains and does not control a bounded context's internal language. The number in each card is its source data-point count.
Common boundary
A deliberately small exchange boundary for stable identity and meaning genuinely shared by several property domains.
Conveyancing
Legal title, ownership, rights, disclosure, completion and transfer meanings used in conveyancing.
DBT Smart Data
Scheme-level authorisation and controlled sharing meanings that apply across participating sectors.
Estate agency
Marketing, pricing, letting, media and consumer disclosure meanings used in estate agency.
Finance and banking
Mortgage, repayment, insurance and financial-obligation meanings used by lenders and advisers.
Property data services
Authoritative and derived property information supplied through searches, registers, certificates and utility records.
Property technology
Digital property records, smart-home capabilities and connectivity meanings used by property technology.
Surveying and valuation
Physical construction, condition, alteration and installed-feature meanings used to inspect and value property.
Cross-domain mappings: awaiting working-group evidence. The current candidate asserts no default
owl:sameAs relationships. See the
Category 8 mapping method and current non-claims.
Candidate artefacts
All views are generated from the maintained TOML model and the closed 451-item evidence catalogue.
Business glossary
Generated candidate terms and definitions.
Open artefactData dictionary
Generated candidate data definitions and constraints.
Open artefactControlled vocabularies
Candidate schemes and controlled values.
Open artefactContext map
Declared semantic-home boundaries.
Open artefactCandidate manifest
Version, scope and source cut details.
Open artefactValidation receipt
Deterministic validation evidence.
Open artefactHow to read this baseline
Source evidence
Workbook row, full JSON path, field name, source datatype, status, condition and source description are preserved verbatim.
Candidate meaning
Each source item has a proposed definition, semantic home, model role, disposition, vocabulary and trace to candidate resources.
Deterministic assurance
Coverage, trace closure, RDF syntax, SHACL probes and SPARQL competency questions are regenerated and checked without granting semantic approval.
Browse all 451 items
Search by label, definition or full source path. Filter by bounded context, proposed model role, disposition, datatype, requiredness or vocabulary use. Select a label to inspect the source evidence, candidate semantics, constraints and traced model constructs together.
Download the generated JSON list Read ADR-0066 Read ADR-0067
Selected source data point
Item detail
Validation boundary
| Workbook reconciliation | Pass — 451/451 required rows accounted for |
|---|---|
| Unique source identities | 451 full JSON paths and 451 stable catalogue IDs |
| Candidate coverage | Pass — every item has one semantic home and reaches at least one traced ontology resource |
| RDF profile | RDF 1.2 Basic syntax accepted by Apache Jena RIOT version 6.1.0; full RDF 1.2 is not claimed |
| SHACL profile | SHACL 1.2 Core target; positive and negative core-subset probes pass under Apache Jena SHACL version 6.1.0 |
| SPARQL profile | SPARQL 1.2 target; portable competency-query subset passes under Apache Jena version 6.1.0 |
| Semantic authority | Machine-proposed — working-group review and recorded human disposition remain required |
Comments
Loading comments…
Sign in to post a comment