Provenance and conformance are read apart

Answers Epistemology · Nomenclature

A cited source states what this model was built from; a commitment states what must hold for its shapes to mean anything. They answer different questions and are presented as peers, not one nested inside the other. A source is never read as evidence of a commitment, and a commitment is never read as evidence of a fact.

What goes wrong without it

What a model was built from and what it commits to are different claims, and presenting them together lets a citation stand in for an obligation. Dublin Core keeps them as separate terms for the same reason: a standard consulted and a standard conformed to are not the same relationship, and only one of them can be tested.

What proves it — 1

Each is a gate the build runs: a check inside a ring, a whole ring, or an eval beside them. A build stops at the first that refuses.

• foundation integritycitation coverage
  Every kind, relationship and deliverable is licensed by a cited rule, every source is cited by at least one rule, and every foundation names, among the cited works, the standard that represents it.

Derived from — 2

• Dublin Core Metadata InitiativeDCMI Metadata Terms
• W3CPROV-O: The PROV Ontology

Where this model stands

The research ledger and the rule ledger each have their own reading surface, and each names the other rather than containing it.

The model page reads built from, governed by, verified by, in that order, rather than leading with any of them.

Each foundation names the engineering standard that represents it directly, among the cited works, and the build refuses a foundation that names a work no commitment stands on; the foundation's page reads the standard beside the commitments and the checks.

What it does not claim

No dcterms identifiers are persisted; the distinction is adopted as a reading rule, not as an imported vocabulary.

RUL-015