Commitment · Foundational

Use external content taxonomy as a mapping, not mastery

adopted guidance · no gate tests it

A recognized content taxonomy may improve portability and comparability, but umi-graph's Content Types, Surfaces and Creative Formats remain locally governed terms until a versioned mapping is justified. Creative Asset records point to those terms without becoming taxonomy values.

What goes wrong without it

Adopting an industry taxonomy as the master buys comparability and hands over governance of the vocabulary. When the external scheme revises, local meanings move with it, and a term that carried a specific operational sense is reinterpreted by someone else's committee. A mapping keeps both: the comparison when it is wanted, and the local meaning when it is not.

Derived from — 1

IAB Tech LabContent Taxonomy

Kinds it licenses

Content Types Surface Creative Formats Creative Assets

Relationships it licenses

delivered on · may be expressed as

Where this model stands

Content Types, Surface and Creative Formats are locally governed terms; the IAB Content Taxonomy is cited as the scheme they may one day be mapped to, and no identifier from it is stored on any row.

What it does not claim

No IAB identifier or external taxonomy value is stored. The citation is to the scheme, not an import of it.

Add a versioned mapping contract only when a real content source requires interoperability.

RUL-005