Usage / Use case Implemented
Describe a service contract and its attribution
Select sourced HTTP, IT-domain and provenance concepts for a service description, checking the meaning and attribution of each assertion. Vocabulary does not implement the service or prove its behavior.
Platform
What serves this use case
Features
- Ontology: HTTP Implemented
- Ontology: IT Implemented
- Ontology: PROV Implemented
Values
Values composed with this use case
- Value Partial
Represent attribution explicitly.
Record attribution in typed facets and connect it to consumer-verified actors and populated lineage.
Supported by Capabilities(1)
Supported by Features(3)
Pains
Pain points
- Pain point Partial
Architecture, compliance, and quality tools don’t speak to each other.
Each tool keeps its own model of the same IT reality; integrations are bespoke mappings that rot, and knowledge stays siloed per tool and per team.
Addressed by Affordances(1)
Addressed by Capabilities(6)
Addressed by Features(17)
Experienced by Actor types(9)
Addressed through Use cases(16)
- Inspect one subject across framework perspectives
- Agree a reusable domain typing contract
- Qualify transfer between independent processors
- Read and model a governance decision
- Describe a service contract and its attribution
- Describe payment request and notification boundaries
- Describe payment settlement and recovery boundaries
- Incorporate an accepted grammar extension
- Read and revise definitions through the API
- Qualify an execution adapter for an integration
- Maintain a governed IT definition inventory
- Type a governance concern with the systemic primitives
- Define a domain vocabulary as an Archetype
- Express an obligation in the governance grammar
- Describe an interaction with sourced protocol vocabulary
- Work from shared, typed definitions